IN RE DOUGLAS/TWIGGS/THOMAS MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of IESHAIE FINETTA DOUGLAS,
TYRONE SLYSHON DOUGLAS, ALEXIS
ANDREA TWIGGS, BRIANA SALMONA
TWIGGS and DAVON EDJUAN THOMAS, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
June 1, 1999
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 210367
Wayne Juvenile Court
LC No. 92-297775
ERICA ANDREA THOMAS,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
DWIGHT DICUS, TYRONE DOUGLAS and
DAVID ALLEN TWIGGS,
Respondents.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 210377
Wayne Juvenile Court
LC No. 92-297775
DAVID ALLEN TWIGGS,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
-1
ERICA ANDREA THOMAS, DWIGHT DICUS
and TYRONE DOUGLAS,
Respondents.
Before: Griffin, P.J., and Cavanagh and Fitzgerald, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondents-appellants appeal as of right from the juvenile court order terminating their
parental rights to the minor children 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). We affirm.
Only one statutory ground is required to terminate parental rights. In re McIntyre, 192 Mich
App 47, 50; 480 NW2d 293 (1991). Although the juvenile court may have erred in terminating
respondents-appellants’ parental rights under §19b(3)(a)(ii), the juvenile court did not clearly err in
finding that the remaining statutory grounds for termination, that is, §§ 19b(3)(c)(i), (g) and (j), were
established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 5.974(I); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445
NW2d 161 (1989). Further, respondents-appellants failed to show that termination of their parental
rights was clearly not in the children’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5);
In re Hall-Smith, 222 Mich App 470, 472-473; 564 NW2d 156 (1997). Thus, the juvenile court did
not err in terminating respondents-appellants’ parental rights to the children. Id.
Affirmed.
/s/ Richard Allen Griffin
/s/ Mark J. Cavanagh
/s/ E. Thomas Fitzgerald
-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.
