In re Interest of Mya C. & Sunday C., 840 N.W.2d 493

Nyamal M., a Sudanese mother, was a minor when her two daughters were removed and adjudicated neglected; initial dispositional orders required her to continue her education and seek part-time work.
Subsequent review orders continued those requirements; Nyamal aged out of juvenile court at 19, dropped out of high school, began GED classes, and obtained temporary full-time employment.
At a July 2012 review hearing, the juvenile court (over defense objection) modified the rehabilitation plan to require Nyamal to “actively pursue a GED or a high school diploma” and to provide a legal means of financial support for the children.
Nyamal appealed the August 9, 2012 order contending the new requirement was not reasonably related to correction of the conditions that led to adjudication; the State argued the order merely continued prior education requirements and was not appealable.
The Nebraska Court of Appeals dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, treating the order as a continuation of earlier orders; the Nebraska Supreme Court granted further review.
The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed, holding the August 2012 order imposed a material, new condition for reunification (requiring pursuit of a diploma or GED and lawful means of support) and thus was a final, appealable order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the August 2012 juvenile court review order was final and appealable	Nyamal: the order materially changed reunification conditions by requiring active pursuit of a diploma/GED and thus affected a substantial right	State: the order merely continued prior education requirements and did not affect a substantial right	Held: Order imposed a material change (diploma/GED and lawful support), affected a substantial right, and was appealable

In re Guardianship of Rebecca B. et al., 260 Neb. 922 (stating review orders that only continue prior requirements do not affect substantial rights)
In re Interest of Joshua R. et al., 265 Neb. 374 (rehabilitation plan orders affect parental substantial rights)
In re Interest of A.W. et al., 16 Neb. App. 210 (holding reduced visitation can make a review order appealable)
In re Interest of Diana M. et al., 20 Neb. App. 472 (addressing material changes in case plans at review hearings)
In re Interest of Mainor T. & Estela T., 267 Neb. 232 (recognizing strong constitutional protections for parental custody rights)