IN RE ROBERT NASH MINOR

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of ROBERT NASH, Minor. FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY, UNPUBLISHED April 28, 2000 Petitioner-Appellee, v HOLLI JO SANDERS, No. 219349 Wayne Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 97-360940 Respondent-Appellant, and ROBERT NASH, SR., Respondent. Before: Collins, P.J., and Neff and Smolenski, JJ. MEMORANDUM. Respondent-appellant appeals as of right a family court order terminating her parental rights to the minor child pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i), (g) and (j); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i), (g) and (j). We affirm. Only one statutory ground for termination must be established to terminate parental rights. In re Huisman, 230 Mich App 372, 384-385; 584 NW2d 349 (1998). Here, the family court did not clearly err in finding that §§ 19b(3)(c)(i) and (g) were both established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 5.974(I); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Accordingly, we need not decide whether termination was also proper under §§ 19b(3)(a)(ii) and (j). In re Huisman, supra. Respondent-appellant does not argue, nor does the record indicate, that termination of her parental rights was clearly not in the child’s best interests. MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5). Thus, we conclude that the family court did not err in terminating respondent­ appellant’s parental rights to the child. Affirmed. /s/ Jeffrey G. Collins /s/ Janet T. Neff /s/ Michael R. Smolenski -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.