IN RE MOODY MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of JOSHUA EARL MOODY, DANIEL
WILLIAM MOODY, and MELISSA ANN
MOODY, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
August 1, 2000
Petitioner -Appellee,
v
No. 221332
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 98-363068
JANET LYNNE MOODY,
Respondent -Appellant,
and
WILLIAM EARL MOODY,
Respondent.
___________________________________________
In the Matter of JOSHUA EARL MOODY, DANIEL
WILLIAM MOODY, and MELISSA ANN
MOODY, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 221505
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
WILLIAM EARL MOODY,
-1
LC No. 98-363068
-2
Respondent-Appellant,
and
JANET LYNNE MOODY,
Respondent.
Before: White, P.J., and Doctoroff and O’Connell, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
In docket no. 221332, respondent Janet Lynne Moody appeals as of right from an order of the
Wayne Circuit Court, Family Division, terminating her parental rights to her three children, Joshua,
Daniel, and Melissa Moody, pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(ii), (c)(i), (g), and (j); MSA
27.3178(598.19b)(3)(b)(ii), (c)(i), (g), and (j).
In docket no. 221505, respondent William Earl Moody appeals as of right from an order of the
Wayne Circuit Court, Family Division, terminating his parental rights to the children pursuant to MCL
712A.19b(3)(b)(i), (g), (h), and (j); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(b)(i), (g), (h), and (j).
We review the trial court’s findings under the clearly erroneous standard. MCR 5.974(I); In re
Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). After having reviewed the record, we conclude
that the family court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination were
established by clear and convincing evidence. Id. Furthermore, respondents failed to show that
termination of their parental rights was clearly not in the children’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5);
MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5); In re Hall-Smith, 222 Mich App 470, 472-473; 564 NW2d 156
(1997). Thus, the trial court did not err in terminating respondent’s parental rights to the children. Id.
Affirmed.
/s/ Helene N. White
/s/ Martin M. Doctoroff
/s/ Peter D. O’Connell
-3
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.
