In the Interest of M.H., Minor Child
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 18-1993 Filed January 23, 2019 IN THE INTEREST OF M.H., Minor Child, J.O., Mother, Appellant. ________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Woodbury County, Mary L. Timko, Associate Juvenile Judge. A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights. AFFIRMED. John S. Moeller of John S. Moeller, P.C., Sioux City, for appellant mother. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Anagha Dixit, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee State. Theresa Rachel of Fankhauser Rachel, PLC, Sioux City, guardian ad litem for minor child. Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and Bower, JJ. 2 MULLINS, Judge. A mother appeals the termination of her parental rights to her minor child pursuant to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f) and (l) (2018). Her argument on appeal is limited to her statements of disagreement with the juvenile court’s conclusions “that the child cannot be returned to the custody of the mother as provided in section 232.102” and her “prognosis indicates that the child will not be able to be returned to the custody of the [mother] within a reasonable period of time considering the child’s age and need for a permanent home.” See Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(f)(4), (l)(3). The mother provides no facts, argument, or analysis in support of her statements of disagreement. Her failure to do so waives error. See Iowa R. App. P. 6.903(2)(g)(3); see also In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492 (Iowa 2000) (“A broad, all encompassing argument is insufficient to identify error in cases of de novo review.”); Hyler v. Garner, 548 N.W.2d 864, 876 (Iowa 1996) (“[W]e will not speculate on the arguments [a party] might have made and then search for legal authority and comb the record for facts to support such arguments.”); Inghram v. Dairyland Mut. Ins. Co., 215 N.W.2d 239, 240 (Iowa 1974) (“To reach the merits of this case would require us to assume a partisan role and undertake the appellant’s research and advocacy. This role is one we refuse to assume.”). Although we acknowledge termination-of-parental-rights appeals are expedited and the opportunity for briefing is abbreviated, see generally Iowa R. App. P. 6.201, the mother’s position is not adequately formulated to facilitate our review. Consequently, we affirm the termination of her parental rights. AFFIRMED.
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.
