IN RE HOOD/WILLIAMS/MARSHALL MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of TIQUAN HOOD, ANTONIO
WILLIAMS, and TRAVON MARSHALL, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
June 2, 2000
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 223370
Genesee Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 97-109319-NA
NATASHA MARSHALL,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
ANTONIO WILLIAMS and MARVIN MANGLE,
Respondents.
Before: Hoekstra, P.J., and Holbrook, Jr., and Zahra, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from a family court order terminating her parental
rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i), (g) and (j); MSA
27.3178(598.19b)(3)(c)(i), (g) and (j). We affirm.
Respondent-appellant contends that the family court's decision to terminate her parental rights is
not supported by clear and convincing evidence. Respondent-appellant’s discussion of this issue is
deficient because it is not directed at the elements of the applicable statutory grounds for termination.
Goolsby v Detroit, 419 Mich 651, 655 n 1; 358 NW2d 856 (1984). In any event, having considered
respondent-appellant's arguments in light of the statutory requirements, we are not persuaded that
respondent-appellant has established any clear error in the family court's decision. MCR 5.974(I); In
-1
re Sours, 459 Mich 624, 633; 593 NW2d 520 (1999); In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445 NW2d
161 (1989).
We deem respondent-appellant's claim of judicial bias to be abandoned because it is not set
forth in the statement of the issue presented and also lacks citation to any supporting authority.
Goolsby, supra at 655; Meagher v McNeely & Lincoln, Inc, 212 Mich App 154, 156; 536 NW2d
851 (1995). Further, respondent-appellant failed to properly preserve this claim by first raising it in the
trial court. Meagher v Wayne State Univ, 222 Mich App 700, 726; 565 NW2d 401 (1997).
Regardless, having considered the family court's challenged remark in the context of the entire record,
we are satisfied that respondent-appellant has not shown that the family court was biased. Cain v
Dep't of Corrections, 451 Mich 470; 548 NW2d 210 (1996); Meagher, supra at 726.
Affirmed.
/s/ Joel P. Hoekstra
/s/ Donald E. Holbrook, Jr.
/s/ Brian K. Zahra
-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.
