In re M.J.M.G.
543 S.W.3d 862
Tex. App.2017Background
- Child M.J.M.G. born Oct. 14, 2016; mother and child tested positive for amphetamines and marijuana at birth; child had NICU stay for respiratory issues and withdrawal.
- DFPS filed for protection, conservatorship, and termination on Oct. 24, 2016.
- At trial (May 18, 2017), V.M. appeared, testified he was the father, and opposed termination.
- Trial court terminated V.M.'s parental rights based on: (1) failure to timely file an admission of paternity or a Chapter 160 counterclaim (Tex. Fam. Code § 161.002(b)(1)); and (2) constructive abandonment and controlled-substance use (Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001(b)(1)(N), (P)), and found termination was in the child’s best interest (§ 161.001(b)(2)).
- On appeal, V.M. challenged only the best-interest finding; he did not challenge the unchallenged statutory ground under § 161.002(b)(1).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination is supported because V.M. failed to timely file an admission of paternity under § 161.002(b)(1) | State: V.M. failed to file admission/counterclaim, supporting termination without needing best-interest proof. | V.M.: Appeared and admitted paternity at trial, so § 161.002(b)(1) should not apply (he preserved rights to contest § 161.001 grounds). | Court: V.M. did not challenge this ground on appeal; appellate waiver applies and § 161.002(b)(1) stands. |
| Whether evidence is legally/factually insufficient to show termination is in the child’s best interest under § 161.001(b)(2) | V.M.: Contends evidence fails to prove termination is in child’s best interest. | State: Best-interest finding supported by statutory grounds and trial evidence. | Court: Did not reach merits — overruled issue because an independent unchallenged ground supports termination. |
Key Cases Cited
- Blackstone Med., Inc. v. Phoenix Surgicals, L.L.C., 470 S.W.3d 636 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2015) (appellant must challenge all independent bases that fully support a judgment)
- Britton v. Tex. Dep't of Criminal Justice, 95 S.W.3d 676 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2002) (same principle regarding failure to challenge independent grounds)
- In re N.L.D., 412 S.W.3d 810 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2013) (affirming termination on unchallenged ground without reviewing challenged grounds)
- In re Elamex, S.A. de C.V., 367 S.W.3d 879 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2012) (accept unchallenged independent grounds and affirm adverse ruling)
- Toliver v. Dep't of Family & Protective Servs., 217 S.W.3d 85 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006) (appearing and asserting paternity at trial triggers right to have Department prove § 161.001 grounds and best interest)