Interest of G.T.

2019 ND 247
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 29, 2019
Docket20190257
StatusPublished

This text of 2019 ND 247 (Interest of G.T.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Interest of G.T., 2019 ND 247 (N.D. 2019).

Opinion

Filed 10/29/2019 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT ST AT E O F N O RTH D AK O T A

2019 ND 247

In the Interest of G.T., a child In the Interest of E.T., a child In the Interest of C.T., a child In the Interest of I.T., a child

Lyndsey Tungseth, L.S.W., Cass County Social Services, Petitioner and Appellee v. C.J. and S.T., Respondents and Appellants

Nos. 20190257, 20190258, 20190259, 20190260, 20190265, 20190266, 20190267 & 20190268

Appeal from the Juvenile Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable Scott A. Griffeth, Juvenile Referee.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Diane Davies-Luger, Assistant State’s Attorney, Fargo, ND, for petitioner and appellee; submitted on brief.

E. Jane Sundby, West Fargo, ND, for respondent and appellant C.J.; submitted on brief.

Monte L. Rogneby and Megan J. Gordon, Bismarck, ND, for respondent and appellant S.T.; submitted on brief. Interest of G.T., E.T., C.T., I.T. Nos. 20190257-20190260 & 20190265-20190268

[¶1] C.J., the mother, and S.T., the father, separately appeal from a juvenile court judgment terminating parental rights to four children. The mother argues the juvenile court erred by finding the causes of the deprivation were likely to continue, causing harm to the children. The father argues several findings of fact are clearly erroneous and his due process rights were violated when the court refused to grant a continuance or make other arrangements so he could attend the termination hearing.

[¶2] We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2),(4), and (7). Matter of Adoption of J.M.H., 1997 ND 99, ¶ 18, 564 N.W.2d 623 (“Prisoners do not have a constitutional due process right to personally appear at a proceeding for the termination of their parental rights. Prisoners’ due process rights generally are satisfied if they are represented by counsel and have an opportunity to appear by deposition or other discovery technique.”) (internal citation omitted). See In Interest of A.B., 2017 ND 178, ¶ 12, 898 N.W.2d 676.

[¶3] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J. Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jon J. Jensen Jerod E. Tufte

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Matter of Adoption of JMH
1997 ND 99 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1997)
Interest of A.B.
2017 ND 178 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2019 ND 247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/interest-of-gt-nd-2019.