IN RE ROBERT NASH MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of ROBERT NASH, Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
April 28, 2000
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
HOLLI JO SANDERS,
No. 219349
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 97-360940
Respondent-Appellant,
and
ROBERT NASH, SR.,
Respondent.
Before: Collins, P.J., and Neff and Smolenski, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right a family court order terminating her parental rights to
the minor child pursuant to 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 for termination must be established to terminate parental rights. In re
Huisman, 230 Mich App 372, 384-385; 584 NW2d 349 (1998). Here, the family court did not
clearly err in finding that §§ 19b(3)(c)(i) and (g) were both established by clear and convincing
evidence. MCR 5.974(I); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Accordingly,
we need not decide whether termination was also proper under §§ 19b(3)(a)(ii) and (j). In re
Huisman, supra. Respondent-appellant does not argue, nor does the record indicate, that termination
of her parental rights was clearly not in the child’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA
27.3178(598.19b)(5). Thus, we conclude that the family court did not err in terminating respondent
appellant’s parental rights to the child.
Affirmed.
/s/ Jeffrey G. Collins
/s/ Janet T. Neff
/s/ Michael R. Smolenski
-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.