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 termination of parental rights of Montes S. (Father) to his children. The specific events leading to this legal action are not detailed in the provided text.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellee (Children, Youth & Families Department): The arguments presented by the Petitioner-Appellee are not specified in the provided text.
• Respondent-Appellant (Montes S., Father): Father argues that the evidence is insufficient to support the termination of his parental rights, relying on the same facts as stated in the docketing statement, recited in the district court’s judgment, and referenced in the calendar notice (para 2).

Legal Issues

• Whether sufficient evidence supported the termination of Father’s parental rights.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's termination of Father's parental rights.

Reasons

• MEDINA, Judge, with KRISTINA BOGARDUS, Judge, and JANE B. YOHALEM, Judge concurring: The Court considered Father's memorandum in opposition but found it unpersuasive, affirming the termination of parental rights for the reasons stated in their notice of proposed disposition. Father's arguments, which were a repetition of earlier statements, did not fulfill the requirement to specifically point out errors of law and fact. The Court emphasized that the burden is on the party opposing the proposed disposition to clearly point out errors in fact or law, which Father failed to do (paras 1-2).