IN RE RICKY GANN JR MINOR
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of R.G., Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
September 27, 2002
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 239480
Jackson Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 00-004938-NA
CASEY GANN,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
RICKY GANN,
Respondent.
In the Matter of R.G., Minor.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 239837
Jackson Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 00-004938-NA
RICKY GANN,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
CASEY GANN,
Respondent.
Before: Whitbeck, C.J., and Sawyer and Kelly, JJ.
-1-
MEMORANDUM.
Respondents-appellants appeal as of right from the circuit court order terminating their
parental rights to the minor child under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) and (g). Their appeals have
been consolidated for our review. This case is being decided without oral argument pursuant to
MCR 7.214(E). We affirm.
In making a termination decision, the trial court must engage in a two-step analysis.
First, it must determine if a statutory ground for termination has been established by clear and
convincing evidence. In re Sours Minors, 459 Mich 624, 632; 593 NW2d 520 (1999). Second,
if a statutory ground has been established, the trial court must terminate parental rights unless
there exists clear evidence on the whole record that it is not in the child’s best interests to
terminate parental rights. In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341, 354; 603 NW2d 787 (2000).
The Court has carefully reviewed the record on appeal, the opinion of the trial court, and
the parties’ briefs. We are not persuaded that the trial court erred in finding that the statutory
grounds for termination were met and that it was in the best interests of the child to terminate the
parental rights. Accordingly, we find no abuse of discretion by the trial court in terminating
respondents’ parental rights.
Affirmed.
/s/ William C. Whitbeck
/s/ David H. Sawyer
/s/ Kirsten Frank Kelly
-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.
