IN RE PENNINGTON MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of RODNEY A. PENNINGTON, III,
and ADAM MICHAEL LEE PENNINGTON,
Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
March 16, 2004
Petitioner-Appellee,
V
No. 248717
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 99-384423
RODNEY DALE PENNINGTON,
Respondent-Appellant.
Before: Griffin, P.J., and White and Donofrio, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent appeals as of right from an order terminating his parental rights to the minor
children pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(b)(ii), (c)(i), and (g). The children have been in foster
care their entire lives, have never lived with respondent, and have never had unsupervised
visitation with him. After three years, respondent failed to complete his treatment plan. We
affirm.
Respondent argues that the trial court clearly erred in finding that the statutory grounds
for termination were established by clear and convincing evidence. We review the trial court’s
findings of fact for clear error. MCR 3.977(J); In re Trejo, 462 Mich 341, 351; 612 NW2d 407
(2000); In re Sours, 459 Mich 624, 633; 593 NW2d 520 (1999). Although we are not persuaded
that termination was proper under § 19b(3)9b)(ii), the trial court did not clearly err in finding that
termination was warranted under §§ 19b(3)9c)(i) and (g). The evidence clearly and convincing
showed that respondent failed to fully comply with the parent-agency agreement. After more
than three years of intervention, respondent never reached a point where unsupervised visitation
was possible. The evidence indicated that respondent moved repeatedly, that he did not provide
regular verification of employment, that he failed to establish that he was living a drug and
alcohol free lifestyle, and that he never demonstrated that he was capable of parenting the
children.
Further, the evidence did not show that termination of respondent’s parental rights was
clearly not in the children’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo, supra. The children
had lived in foster care their entire lives. As the trial court noted, extraordinary efforts had been
-1-
made to preserve the family, but respondent demonstrated an unwillingness to rectify conditions
that were within his control. The trial court did not err in terminating respondent’s parental
rights to the children.
Affirmed.
/s/ Richard Allen Griffin
/s/ Helene N. White
/s/ Pat M. Donofrio
-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.
