IN RE TYUS MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
___________________________________________
In the Matter of DALLAS CHRISTIAN TYUS,
CODY CODIA TYUS, DANIELLE GENOA TYUS,
GENESIS APRIL TYUS, JAMES WINDELL TYUS,
SHILOH NIKKI TYUS, and SHANNONDORA
CALLY TYUS, Minors.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, f/k/a
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
December 20, 2005
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 263064
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 03-425666-NA
JAMES TYUS,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
CHRIS LAWANA ROBERTSON,
Respondent.
Before: Owens, P.J., and Saad and Fort Hood, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right the trial court order terminating his parental
rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i), (g), (j), and (k)(i). We affirm.
The trial court did not clearly err in finding that statutory grounds for termination of
respondent-appellant’s parental rights were established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR
3.977(J); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Further, the evidence did not
show that termination of respondent-appellant’s parental rights was clearly not in the children’s
best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407
(2000). During this case, respondent-appellant failed to make any meaningful attempts to regain
custody of his children. Respondent-appellant never signed a parent/agency agreement and
failed to begin or complete any of its requirements. He had not seen his children since before
they were taken into the trial court’s temporary custody until just before the termination hearing.
Two of the younger children did not even know who respondent-appellant was. He had failed to
-1-
provide any support for the children throughout this case and had a significant arrearage for past
child support. Accordingly, the trial court properly terminated respondent-appellant’s parental
rights.
Respondent-appellant also argues that the trial judge should have been disqualified
because the judge’s comments when he rendered his decision displayed an obvious bias and
partiality against respondent-appellant because he and the mother of the children were never
married. In order to preserve an issue of alleged judicial bias based on judicial conduct,
respondent-appellant was required to file a motion to disqualify within 14 days after he
discovered the grounds for disqualification and include an affidavit including all grounds for
disqualification that were known. MCR 2.003(C)(1); Cain v Dept of Corrections, 451 Mich 470,
494; 548 NW2d 210 (1996). Respondent-appellant failed to preserve this issue for review.
Moreover, a review of the record reveals that disqualification of the trial judge was not required.
Although the trial judge’s remarks were critical and disapproving of respondent-appellant,
respondent-appellant failed to show actual bias or prejudice as required by MCR 2.003(B)(1).
Cain, supra at 494-495. The trial judge’s comments did not display a deep-seated antagonism
toward unmarried couples, but rather a reaction to the facts of this case.
Affirmed.
/s/ Donald S. Owens
/s/ Henry William Saad
/s/ Karen M. Fort Hood
-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.
