IN RE EMILY ANN BAKER MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of EMILY ANN BAKER, Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
October 22, 1999
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
DONALD LEE MORRISON,
No. 214416
Isabella Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 97-000051 NA
Respondent-Appellant,
and
MARIA BAKER,
Respondent.
Before: Whitbeck, P.J. and Gribbs and White, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals by delayed leave granted from the family court order terminating
his parental rights to the minor child under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) and (g); MSA
27.3178(598.19b)(3)(c)(i) and (g). We affirm. This case is being decided without oral argument
pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
The family court did not abuse its discretion by allowing petitioner to amend the permanent
custody petition to allege § 19b(3)(g) as a statutory basis for termination. MCR 5.118(A)(2); Juravle
v Ozdagler, 149 Mich App 148, 156; 385 NW2d 627 (1985). Respondent-appellant’s substantial
rights were not materially prejudiced by the amendment, given that the request to terminate under
§ 19b(3)(g) was based on the same factual allegations already alleged in the original petition.
Further, the court did not clearly err in finding that §19b(3)(g) was established by clear and
convincing evidence. The child had considerable special needs, and respondent’s testimony and history
demonstrated that he had failed to provide proper care or custody for her, and that he had no realistic
plan for caring for her in the future.
Respondent-appellant does not argue that termination of his parental rights was clearly not in the
child’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). Accordingly, the trial court did not err in terminating
respondent-appellant’s parental rights to the child. Id.
Lastly, we need not address respondent’s claim of error regarding § 19b(3)(c)(i) because only
one statutory ground need be established to support the termination of parental rights. In re McIntyre,
192 Mich App 47, 50; 480 NW2d 293 (1991).
Affirmed.
/s/ William C. Whitbeck
/s/ Roman S. Gribbs
/s/ Helene N. White
-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.
