In the Interest of K.W. and K.W., Children
335 S.W.3d 767
| Tex. App. | 2011Background
- Biological parents appeal after the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services sought termination of their parental rights.
- The trial court terminated rights based on a predicate finding under Texas Family Code §161.001(1) and best-interest criteria.
- The children were placed in foster care with a prospective adoptive couple (the Mearigs) who wished to adopt.
- The parents had prior terminations involving an older child (A.B.) and had documented drug use and unstable housing.
- The trial court found reliability in Holley factors supporting a finding that termination was in the children’s best interest.
- The appeal proceeds from a final termination order, with the court affirming the termination.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the challenge to predicate findings preserved, and what grounds support termination? | Parents argue insufficient predicate evidence for §161.001(1) grounds. | TDFPS argues predicate findings and best-interest support justify termination. | Waived challenge to predicate sufficiency; inevitable focus on best interest. |
| Whether termination is in the children’s best interest under Holley factors | Parents contend best-interest finding is not supported by evidence. | TDFPS contends Holley factors support termination given danger and parental deficiencies. | Terminations supported by clear and convincing evidence under Holley factors. |
| Is termination valid under any single predicate ground given multiple grounds alleged? | If multiple grounds exist, challenge each; otherwise, insufficiency elsewhere. | Any single proven ground, if supported, justifies termination. | Because §161.001(1)(M) was unchallenged and supports termination, others need not be reviewed. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re A.V., 113 S.W.3d 355 (Tex. 2003) (multiple predicate grounds; termination upheld on one proper ground)
- In re N.R., 101 S.W.3d 771 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2003) (affirmation based on sufficient predicate grounds)
- J.O.A., 283 S.W.3d 336 (Tex. 2009) (best-interests standard; clear and convincing standard applied)
- J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256 (Tex. 2002) (standard for reviewing best-interest findings; due-process considerations)
- Holley v. Adams, 544 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. 1976) (Holley factors guide best-interest determination)