317 Conn. 723
Conn.2015Background
- Petitioner, Commissioner of Children and Families, filed termination petitions for two children, Nevaeh W. and Janiyah A., alleging failure to rehabilitate and abandonment.
- Appellate Court reversed the trial court’s judgments on the dispositional phase for lack of written findings addressing each segment of § 17a-112(k).
- Trial court’s memorandum included explicit written findings under each of the seven factors, including factor (k)(4) regarding feelings and emotional ties.
- The trial court also produced articulations and a supplemental articulation clarifying consideration of emotional ties to the children’s foster placement and related witnesses.
- The Supreme Court granted certification to determine whether § 17a-112(k) requires written findings for each factor and whether articulations can cure any deficiency, and to review the sufficiency of the best-interest finding.
- The Court held that the Appellate Court erred; the trial court did consider § 17a-112(k)(4), and articulations sufficiently clarified the basis for its decision; the best-interest determination was factually and legally sound.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 17a-112(k)(4) requires written findings on emotional ties. | Commissioner | Nevaeh W. | No rigid requirement for separate written segments; articulation suffices |
| Whether trial court articulations can cure failure to explicitly address each factor in writing. | Commissioner | Nevaeh W. | Articulations are permissible to complete the record and clarify the basis of the decision |
| Whether the trial court’s best-interests finding is supported and not reversible despite any factor omissions. | Commissioner | Nevaeh W. | Yes; the best-interests finding is factually supported and legally sound |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Eden F., 250 Conn. 674 (1999) (court must consider but need not rely on every factor; written findings required for § 17a-112(k))
- In re Davonta V., 285 Conn. 483 (2008) (stresses permanency and the court’s deference to trial court findings)
- In re Jeisean M., 270 Conn. 382 (2004) (trial court’s weight of expert testimony and best-interest determination)
- In re Jason R., 306 Conn. 438 (2012) (read an opinion as a whole to discern holding and avoid isolated readings)
- In re Nevaeh W., 154 Conn. App. 156 (2014) (Appellate Court reversal based on § 17a-112(k)(4) writing requirements; later clarified by articulation)