IN RE WILLIAMS/LUNDY MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of KAYLEN SHANAY WILLIAMS,
and ALEXIS PENNY KARON LUNDY, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
November 17, 1998
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 206456
Wayne Juvenile Court
LC No. 89-278430
SHAWN LUNDY,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
TARA MELLISA WILLIAMS and LAKYA JUDGE,
Respondents.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 206686
Wayne Juvenile Court
LC No. 89-278430
TARA MELLISA WILLIAMS,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
SHAWN LUNDY and LAKYA JUDGE,
Respondents.
-1
Before: Young, Jr., P.J., and Wahls and Jansen, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
In Docket No. 206456, respondent Shawn Lundy appeals as of right from a juvenile court
order terminating his parental rights to his daughter under MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i), (g) and (j);
MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i), (g) and (j). In Docket No. 206686, respondent Tara Melissa
Williams appeals as of right from the same order terminating her parental rights to her daughters
pursuant to the same statutory grounds. We affirm. These cases are being decided without oral
argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
The juvenile court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination set forth
at MCL 712A.19b(3)(g) and (j); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(g) and (j) were established by clear and
convincing evidence with regard to respondent Shawn Lundy. MCR 5.974(I); In re Miller, 433 Mich
331, 337; 445 NW2d 161(1989); In re Hamlet (After Remand), 225 Mich App 505, 515; 571
NW2d 750 (1997). Additionally, the juvenile court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory
grounds for termination set forth at MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g) and (j); MSA
27.3178(598.19b)(3)(c)(i), (g) and (j), were established by clear and convincing evidence with regard
to respondent Tara Melissa Williams. MCR 5.974(I); In re Miller, supra; In re Hamlet (After
Remand), supra. Finally, both respondents failed to rebut the statutory presumption that termination of
their parental rights is in the minor children’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA
27.3178(598.19b)(5). Thus, the juvenile court did not err in terminating respondents’ parental rights to
the minor children. In re Hamlet (After Remand), supra; In re Hall-Smith, 222 Mich App 470, 471
474; 564 NW2d 156 (1997).
Affirmed.
/s/ Robert P. Young, Jr.
/s/ Myron H. Wahls
/s/ Kathleen Jansen
-2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
