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UNPUBLISHED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.