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 FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED June 30, 2000 Petitioner-Appellee, v No. 223250 St Clair Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 98-004129 YVONNE SCHULTZ, Respondent-Appellant, and WILLIAM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.