IN RE ANDERSON MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of BRANDON MICHAEL
ANDERSON and NICHOLAS ANDERSON,
Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
December 21, 2001
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 232632
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 99-381787
LISA MARIE ANDERSON,
Respondent-Appellant.
Before: Meter, P.J., and Jansen and Gotham*, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the order terminating her parental rights to
the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g), and (j). We affirm. This case is being
decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
The trial court did not err in suspending respondent’s visitation with the minor children
when a petition for termination was filed contemporaneously with or shortly after the order of
suspension. MCL 712A.19b(4). Furthermore, suspension was appropriate under MCL 712A.18
(f)(3)(e) because visitation would have been emotionally harmful to the children, considering
that respondent disappeared for long periods of time and put forth no effort to comply with the
parent-agency agreement and reunite her family.
The trial court did not clearly err in finding that termination of respondent’s parental
rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) and (g) was supported by clear and convincing evidence.
MCR 5.974(I); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989).1
1
We note that only one statutory basis need be established to warrant termination. In re Trejo,
462 Mich 341, 360; 612 NW2d 407 (2000).
* Circuit judge, sitting on the Court of Appeals by assignment.
-1-
Respondent’s due process right to be informed of the nature of the proceedings and
afforded an opportunity to be heard was not violated where the various petitions for termination
throughout the proceedings set forth the specific statutory subsections under which termination
was sought, including MCL 712A.19b(3)(j), quoted the statutory subsections, and set forth facts
clearly describing the allegations against respondent. In re Slis, 144 Mich App 678, 684; 375
NW2d 788 (1985).
Affirmed.
/s/ Patrick M. Meter
/s/ Kathleen Jansen
/s/ Roy D. Gotham
-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.
