IN RE KAVASEIAY MORRISSETTE MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of K. M., Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
March 16, 2001
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 229238
Calhoun Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 97-000667-NA
KEVIN MORRISSETTE,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
SAMANTHA MORRISSETTE,
Respondent.
In the Matter of K. M., Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 229275
Calhoun Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 97-000667-NA
SAMANTHA MORRISSETTE,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
KEVIN MORRISSETTE,
Respondent.
Before: Griffin, P.J., and Neff and White, JJ.
-1-
MEMORANDUM.
In these consolidated cases, respondents appeal by delayed leave granted a family court
order terminating their parental rights to the minor child pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(g)
[neglect], 3(j) [reasonable likelihood of harm if returned to the parent’s home], and 3(k) [abuse
of a child or sibling]; MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(g), (j), and (k), following the death of the
child’s younger sibling. We affirm.
The family court did not err in assuming jurisdiction over the child on the basis that the
home environment of the minor child was unfit by reason of criminality, cruelty, and/or neglect,
MCL 712A.2(b)(2); MSA 27.3178(598.2)(b)(2). MCR 5.972(C)(1); In re S R, 229 Mich App
310, 314; 581 NW2d 291 (1998); In re Toler, 193 Mich App 474, 476; 484 NW2d 672 (1992).
Given the medical testimony and other evidence, the court’s finding that the circumstances of the
sibling’s death were suspicious was not clearly erroneous. The pediatric intensive care physician
determined that the sibling died from non-accidental trauma, and the pathologist’s findings were
inconclusive concerning the cause of death. The issue raised by respondents is one of the weight
to be accorded the witnesses’ testimony; this is a matter for the trial court. MCR 2.613(C); In re
Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989).
Given evidence that the minor child’s sibling died from non-accidental trauma,
respondents’ history of domestic violence and previous child protective services proceedings, and
evidence of a poor prognosis for reunification, the family court did not clearly err in finding that
termination under subsections 3(g), 3(j) and 3(k) was established by clear and convincing
evidence. MCR 5.974(I); In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000).
Affirmed.
/s/ Richard Allen Griffin
/s/ Janet T. Neff
/s/ Helene N. White
-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.
