IN RE ZACHARY KLINE MINOR

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of TANAYA KLINE, Minor. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED June 27, 2000 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 223642 Dickinson Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 98-523-NA COLLEEN KLINE, Respondent-Appellant, and SCOTT KLINE, Respondent. In the Matter of ZACHARY KLINE, Minor. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 223643 Dickinson Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 98-524-NA COLLEEN KLINE, Respondent-Appellant, and SCOTT KLINE, -1­ Respondent. Before: Smolenski, P.J., and Zahra and Collins, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent-appellant appeals by right from a family court order terminating her parental rights to the minor children pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(c) and (g); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(c) and (g). We affirm. Only one statutory ground for termination must be established in order to terminate parental rights. In re Huisman, 230 Mich App 372, 384-385; 584 NW2d 349 (1998). The family court did not clearly err in finding that §§ 19b(3)(c)(i) and (g) were each 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)(c)(ii). In re Huisman, supra. Because respondent-appellant failed to show that termination was clearly not in the children’s best interests, MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5), the family court did not err in terminating her parental rights to the children. In re Hall-Smith, 222 Mich App 470, 472-473; 564 NW2d 156 (1997). Affirmed. /s/ Michael R. Smolenski /s/ Brian K. Zahra /s/ Jeffrey G. Collins -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.