IN RE NAOMI WEAVER MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of N.W., Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
June 26, 2001
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 231761
Ionia Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 00-000169-NA
BONITA WEAVER,
Respondent-Appellant.
Before: Sawyer, P.J., and Griffin and O’Connell, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the family court order terminating her
parental rights to the minor child under MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(ii) and (m); MSA
27.3178(698.19b)(3)(ii) and (m). We affirm.
Respondent argues that the family court erred in concluding that the statutory grounds for
termination were established by clear and convincing evidence. We review a family court’s
factual findings in a termination proceeding for clear error. In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445
NW2d 661 (1989). After a thorough review of the record, we are satisfied that the family court’s
finding that petitioner established a statutory ground to terminate respondent’s parental rights
was not clearly erroneous. See In re Powers Minors, 244 Mich App 111, 117; 624 NW2d 472
(2000) (footnote omitted) (“A family court must find clear and convincing evidence of at least
one statutory ground to terminate a parent’s parental rights.”).
Likewise, we reject respondent’s contention that the family court clearly erred in
concluding that termination of respondent’s parental rights was in the best interest of the minor
child.1 See MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5); In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341,
1
Respondent also contends that the family court improperly considered hearsay evidence and
matters beyond the scope of the record in fashioning its decision. Respondent failed to preserve
(continued…)
-1-
357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000).
Affirmed.
/s/ David H. Sawyer
/s/ Richard Allen Griffin
/s/ Peter D. O’Connell
(…continued)
these issues for our review because she did not timely object in the lower court. See Napier v
Jacobs, 429 Mich 222, 227-228; 414 NW2d 862 (1987). In any event, respondent’s arguments
are without merit. The trial court did not improperly consider hearsay evidence or matters
outside of the record in rendering its decision.
-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.
