L.B. v. B.Z., 343 P.3d 332

Father appealed the juvenile court's order terminating his parental rights to L.B.
The juvenile court found Father abandoned the child by failing to show the normal interest of a natural parent without just cause, citing prolonged minimal contact after 2011.
The court found the child has a positive, parental relationship with the stepfather (J.Z.), who seeks to adopt and prioritizes the child’s needs.
The juvenile court concluded termination was in the child’s best interests based on Father’s abandonment and the stepfather’s established role.
Father argued (1) the abandonment finding was erroneous, (2) termination was not in the child’s best interest, and (3) the court improperly allowed the use of Father’s telephone records on cross-examination after deeming them inadmissible as business records.
The appellate court reviewed factual findings for clear error and affirmed, concluding any evidentiary error was harmless given other non-hearsay evidence.

Issue	Father’s Argument	State/Respondent’s Argument	Held
Whether Father abandoned the child under Utah Code § 78A-6-507(1)(c)	Father contends the juvenile court erred in finding abandonment	Father made minimal contact after 2011, failed to visit or have meaningful contact for a substantial portion of the child’s life	Affirmed: evidence supported finding of abandonment (failure to show normal parental interest without just cause)
Whether termination served the child’s best interests	Father argues termination is not in the child’s best interest	Child has established, loving relationship with stepfather who prioritizes and seeks to adopt the child	Affirmed: court reasonably found termination served child’s best interests
Admissibility/use of telephone records	Father contends records were inadmissible and their use was error	Records were used on cross-examination but other admissible evidence supported the court’s findings	Even if error, appellate court deemed it harmless because non-hearsay evidence supported the decision
Standard of appellate review	(implicit) Father seeks de novo reassessment	Appellate review is for clear error on factual findings; no reweighing when foundation in evidence exists	Applied clear-error standard; affirmed judgment

In re BR., 171 P.3d 485 (Utah 2007) (appellate deference and prohibition on reweighing when evidence supports a foundation for the decision)
In re E.R., 21 P.3d 680 (Utah Ct. App. 2001) (factual findings in juvenile cases reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard)
In re R.A.J., 991 P.2d 1118 (Utah Ct. App. 1999) (court must find termination serves child’s best interest after grounds are established)
In re A.M., 208 P.3d 1058 (Utah Ct. App. 2009) (definition and application of harmless error in juvenile proceedings)
In re J.C., 808 P.2d 1131 (Utah Ct. App. 1991) (harmless error doctrine applied where other non-hearsay evidence supports conclusions)