Interest of J.S., N.S., and B.S. , 2024 ND 200 ( 2024 )

IN THE SUPREME COURT
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2024 ND 200In the Interest of J.S., Jr., Minor Child
State of North Dakota, and the Director of the
Roughrider North Human Service Zone, Petitioners and Appellees
v.
J.S., Jr., a child; J.S., Sr., their father;
and the Executive Director of the North
Dakota Department of Human Services, Respondents
and
S.K., their mother, Respondent and
Appellant
No. 20240257
In the Interest of N.S., Minor Child
State of North Dakota, and the Director of the
Roughrider North Human Service Zone, Petitioners and Appellees
v.
N.S., a child; J.S., Sr., their father;
and the Executive Director of the North
Dakota Department of Human Services, Respondents
and
S.K., their mother, Respondent and
Appellant
No. 20240258
In the Interest of B.S., Minor Child
State of North Dakota, and the Director of the
Roughrider North Human Service Zone, Petitioners and Appellees
v.
B.S., a child; J.S., Sr., their father;
and the Executive Director of the North
Dakota Department of Human Services, Respondents
and
S.K., their mother, Respondent and
Appellant
No. 20240259
Appeal from the Juvenile Court of Stark County, Southwest Judicial District, the
Honorable Dann E. Greenwood, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Amy G. Pikovsky, Assistant State’s Attorney, Dickinson, ND, for petitioners and
appellees; submitted on brief.
Justin M. Balzer, Bismarck, ND, for respondent and appellant; submitted on
brief.
Interest of J.S., N.S., and B.S.
Nos. 20240257-20240259
Per Curiam.
[¶1] S.K. appeals from a juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights
to J.S., Jr., N.S., and B.S. S.K. argues the court erred in finding there was clear and
convincing evidence to terminate her parental rights, and the court abused its
discretion in terminating her parental rights.
[¶2] After review of the record, we conclude the juvenile court’s findings are
not clearly erroneous and the court did not abuse its discretion when it
terminated S.K.’s parental rights. See In re A.C., 2022 ND 123, ¶ 5, 975 N.W.2d
567 (the clearly erroneous standard of review applies to factual findings made in
a termination of parental rights proceeding); see also In re A.P., 2022 ND 131, ¶ 2,
976 N.W.2d 244 (whether terminating parental rights would promote the child’s
welfare is left to the court’s discretion when the required elements are proven by
clear and convincing evidence). We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P.
35.1(a)(2) and (4).
[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
Daniel J. Crothers
Lisa Fair McEvers
Jerod E. Tufte
Douglas A. Bahr
1