Careers

Experiences

Industries

Offices

Our Firm

Pages

Our People

Updates

Practices

Warner Norcross + Judd LLP is a corporate law firm with over 230 attorneys serving clients in nine offices throughout Michigan. Among the largest law firms in Michigan, Warner works in virtually all areas of business law.

Michigan Law Firm - Warner Norcross + Judd LLP

The Michigan Court of Appeals held in <a href="http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/OPINIONS/FINAL/COA/20160524_C327977_61_327977.OPN.PDF" target="_blank" rel="noopener">In re Schadler, minors, No. 327977</a> that parental rights may be terminated because the parent abused the child in violation of MCL 712A.19b(3) (k)(ii), even if the parent was never criminally convicted of the abuse.&nbsp;

contentpilot/introduction

The trial court in Schadler ordered the respondent’s parental rights for his two minor children (CS and BS) terminated. MCL 712A.19b(3) (k)(ii) allows for the termination of parental rights if a parent causes abuse by criminal sexual conduct to the child or the sibling of the child. The trial court found that the respondent violated MCL 712A.19b(3) (k)(ii) with respect to his minor child CS by sexually abusing her. The respondent was also found to have violated MCL 712A.19b(3) (k)(ii) with respect to child BS, because BS the is the sibling of the abused child (CS).

core/paragraph

The court is required to terminate a respondent’s parental rights if: (1) a single statutory ground for termination has been established by clear and convincing evidence, and (2) it has been proved by a preponderance of the evidence that termination of parental rights are in the best interests of the child. MCL 712A.19b(3) and (5). At trial it was shown by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent in Schadler violated MCL 712A.19b(3)(k)(ii) by abusing minor child CS by criminal sexual conduct. The court also determined by a preponderance of the evidence that it was in the best interests of both children if the respondent’s parental rights were terminated.

The respondent argued that because he had not been criminally convicted of criminal sexual conduct, he could not have violated MCL 712A.19b(3)(k)(ii). However, that statute does not require criminal conviction, only proof by clear and convincing evidence that the criminal sexual conduct occurred. The testimony of CS and BS at trial, in addition to testimony from a forensic interviewer and therapist, was sufficient to meet this burden. The Court of Appeals further held that, based on the respondent’s sexual abuse of CS and aggressive discipline of BS, the trial court could have reasonably found that termination of parental rights was in the best interests of the children. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order terminating the parental rights of respondent for both children.

Partner

Jason L. Byrne

Labor and Employment

COA holds that there can be statutory grounds for termination of parental rights because of abuse even if the parent has not been criminally convicted of that abuse

Warner Norcross + Judd LLP is responsible for the contents of our advertising and this website. Please read our full <a href="/privacy-policy/" aria-label="see privacy policy">privacy policy</a> available on our website. If you have any questions or comments about our website or our Privacy Policy please contact us at <a href="mailto:info@wnj.com">info@wnj.com</a> or 616.752.2000.

COA holds that there can be statutory grounds for termination of parental rights because of abuse even if the parent has not been criminally convicted of that abuse

professionals