New Jersey Div. of Youth v. Ts
426 N.J. Super. 54
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | 2012Background
- DYFS sought custody and supervision of I.St. (age 8) and V.Sl (age 4) with the parents TS and ASl; children remained under Division oversight since Dec 2009.
- The underlying arrests of TS and ASl led to a voluntary case plan in Oct 2009 after V.Sl sustained bruising; the plan required supervision and restricted caregiving arrangements.
- Division opened a case but did not file abuse/neglect charges initially; by Dec 2009 the children were returned to TS with services, and the Division pursued abuse/neglect charges despite no findings of abuse against TS/ASl.
- A May 2010 fact-finding found no abuse/neglect by TS/ASl, but the court nevertheless continued the children under the Division’s care and supervision under Title 30, prompting questions about proper standard and ongoing intervention.
- Over the ensuing years, TS challenged the continued Title 30 placement; hearings were held, remands issued, and a 2012 dismissal occurred; the appellate panel found lack of a proper summary hearing and adequate findings supporting continued intervention.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal of Title 9 action requires a summary hearing for Title 30 continuation | TS contends continuation under Title 30 requires a hearing and explicit findings | Division argues continuation is permissible given ongoing health/safety needs | Yes; improper without hearing and adequate findings |
| Whether six-month duration limits on Title 30 orders require a hearing to extend | Extension beyond six months must be reviewed with notice and a hearing | Division may extend if warranted by services needed | Yes; extension requires a summary hearing with notice |
| Whether the court properly balanced the child’s health and safety with parental rights under Title 30 | Court should tailor services to necessity for health/safety | Division’s interventions are necessary for ongoing safety | Court erred by not linking services to health/safety with adequate findings |
| Whether a dismissal of Title 9 action forecloses further Division intervention under Title 30 | Dismissal ends Division involvement | Division may still intervene if needed for health/safety | Dismissal does not foreclose Title 30 involvement; continued review required |
Key Cases Cited
- N.J. Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. N.D., 417 N.J. Super. 96 (App.Div.2010) (limits and procedures for Title 9 actions and Title 30 interventions)
- J.Y., 352 N.J. Super. 245 (App.Div.2002) (standard of proof and evidence for placement decisions)
- In re S.L., 94 N.J. 128 (1983) (considerations for placement review and burden of proof in family-involved actions)
- N.N. (In re Commitment of N.N.), 146 N.J. 112 (1996) (public welfare considerations in child protective proceedings)
- G.M., 198 N.J. 382 (2009) (balance of state interests and parental rights in DYFS interventions)