AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves the appeal by Ignacia K. (Mother) against the termination of her parental rights concerning her children, Isiah S.S. and Faith W. The Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD) was involved in the proceedings, indicating issues related to the welfare and custody of the children.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellee (CYFD): Argued that sufficient evidence supported the termination of Mother's parental rights and that CYFD made reasonable efforts to assist Mother in working her treatment plan.
• Respondent-Appellant (Mother): Challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the termination of her parental rights, arguing that CYFD failed to make reasonable efforts to assist her in working her treatment plan. She requested reassignment to the Court’s general calendar for a thorough review of the termination hearing.

Legal Issues

• Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the termination of Mother's parental rights.
• Whether CYFD made reasonable efforts to assist Mother in working her treatment plan.

Disposition

• The Court affirmed the termination of Mother's parental rights.

Reasons

• The Court, led by Chief Judge J. Miles Hanisee, with Judges Julie J. Vargas and Megan P. Duffy concurring, found no error in the district court’s determination that CYFD acted reasonably in assisting Mother. The Court considered the totality of the circumstances and the statutory scope of review, which is limited to whether CYFD complied with the minimum required under law. The Court was unpersuaded by Mother's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence and her request for reassignment to the general calendar, noting that a party opposing summary disposition is required to specifically point out errors in fact and/or law. The repetition of earlier arguments did not fulfill this requirement. The facts contained in the docketing statement and the record were deemed sufficient to enable the Court to resolve the issues raised on appeal, making summary disposition appropriate (paras 1-4).