IN RE NICOLE, CHRISTOPHER & KATRICE SCHULTZ MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of Nicole Schultz, Christopher Michael
Schultz and Katrice Shana Schultz, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
June 30, 2000
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 223250
St Clair Circuit Court Family Division
LC No. 98-004129
YVONNE SCHULTZ,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
WILLIAM MCDERMOTT and LITTLE LOUIE
MCDERMOTT,
Respondents.
Before: Jansen, P. J., and Hood and Saad, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent Yvonne Schultz appeals as of right the order terminating her parental rights to her
children. We affirm.
After respondent was incarcerated on a parole violation charge based on drug possession, her
children were placed in foster care. A petition for termination of parental rights was f
iled, seeking
termination
under
MCL
712A.19b(3)(a)(c)(g)(h)(j),
and
(m);
MSA
27.3178(598.19b)(3)(a)(c)(g)(h)(j), and (m). A termination hearing was held before a referee, who
found that respondent was in denial as to the effect of her drug use on her children. Given her drug
history, the history of foster care, and her current incarceration, there was clear and convincing evidence
-1
to support the termination of parental rights. The court entered an order consistent with the referee’s
findings.
A trial court’s decision terminating parental rights is reviewed for clear error. In re Sours
Minors, 459 Mich 624, 632; 593 NW2d 520 (1999). If the court finds statutory grounds of
termination were established by clear and convincing evidence, it must terminate parental rights unless
the respondent shows that termination is clearly not in the children’s best interest. In re Hall-Smith,
222 Mich App 470, 472; 654 NW2d 156 (1997).
The court did not clearly err in terminating respondent’s parental rights. Respondent’s drug
history and incarceration clearly support the statutory bases for termination. Where respondent denied
the effect of her drug usage on her children, and had a substantial prison term to serve, she failed to
show that it would be in the children’s best interests not to terminate parental rights.
Affirmed.
/s/ Kathleen Jansen
/s/ Harold Hood
/s/ Henry William Saad
-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.