IN RE REGISTER/HAYES/JOHNSON-HAYES MINORS (Per Curiam Opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of REGISTER/HAYES/JOHNSONHAYES, Minors. UNPUBLISHED August 28, 2014 No. 318657 Wayne Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 11-498913-NA In the Matter of REGISTER/HAYES/JOHNSONHAYES, Minors. No. 318660 Wayne Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 11-498913-NA AFTER REMAND Before: MURRAY, P.J., and JANSEN and SHAPIRO, JJ. PER CURIAM. These consolidated matters return to this Court following our remand1 to the trial court for further findings and conclusions regarding the best interests of the children. We now affirm in full with respect to both respondents. In In re Register/Hayes/Johnson-Hayes, Minors, unpublished opinion of the Court of Appeals, issued July 10, 2014 (Docket Nos. 318657; 318660), we affirmed the trial court s determination that petitioner had presented sufficient evidence to establish the statutory grounds for termination with respect to each respondent. However, because the trial court had made no reviewable findings pertaining to the best interests of the children, we found it necessary to remand the matter for further proceedings and retain jurisdiction. Id. 1 In re Register/Hayes/Johnson-Hayes, Minors, unpublished order of the Court of Appeals, entered July 10, 2014 (Docket Nos. 318657; 318660). -1- Following our remand, the trial court issued a supplemental order in which it set forth several findings and conclusions concerning the children s best interests. The trial court explained that respondent-mother had failed to exhibit sound parenting skills and had failed to acquire stable housing for the minor children. In addition, respondent-mother had failed to follow petitioner s drug-screening protocol and had not completed substance-abuse treatment. The court observed that respondent-father had been incarcerated for most of KD s lifetime and consequently had no parent-child bond with KD. Furthermore, respondent-father lacked a legal source of income and had failed to support KD during his term of incarceration. The trial court noted that KD was thriving in his foster-home placement and that a prospective adoptive family had been identified. The court also noted that the other three minor children were placed with relative caregivers who had signed letters of intent to adopt them. The court found that these relative placements provide the children with stability, permanency, and finality to enable them to thrive and move forward with their lives. In light of respondent-mother s ongoing failure to comply with court-ordered services, the lack of a bond between respondent-father and KD, respondents failure to obtain suitable housing for the children, the children s need for stability and permanency, and the fact that the children were thriving in their placements, the trial court concluded that termination of respondents parental rights was in the best interests of the children. The trial court did not clearly err in this regard. MCR 3.977(K). We conclude that there was sufficient evidence to prove that termination of respondents parental rights was in the children s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); see also In re Moss, 301 Mich App 76, 88-90; 836 NW2d 182 (2013). Affirmed. We retain no further jurisdiction. /s/ Christopher M. Murray /s/ Kathleen Jansen /s/ Douglas B. Shapiro -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.
