In Re Braelyn S. - concurring and dissenting
This text of In Re Braelyn S. - concurring and dissenting (In Re Braelyn S. - concurring and dissenting) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
07/22/2020 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs June 1, 2020
IN RE: BRAELYN K. S.
Chancery Court for Sullivan County No. 19-CK-41754M
No. E2020-00043-COA-R3-PT
RICHARD H. DINKINS, J., concurring and dissenting.
Because I believe that the line of cases holding that the petitioner seeking to terminate a parent’s rights under Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-1-113(g)(14) must prove both a “failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody” with respect to the first prong of the analysis, I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority’s opinion. See In re Ayden S., No. M2017-01185-COA-R3-PT, 2018 WL 2447044, at *7 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 31, 2018). In all other respects, including affirming the termination of Father’s parental rights, I concur.
/s/ Richard H. Dinkins.
RICHARD H. DINKINS, JUDGE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
In Re Braelyn S. - concurring and dissenting, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-braelyn-s-concurring-and-dissenting-tennctapp-2020.