IN RE PURNELL MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of MARQIETTA PURNELL,
CHARITA PURNELL, DESMOND PURNELL,
ARICHMOND PURNELL, DENZEL PURNELL,
MARCUS PURNELL and CHRISTIAN PURNELL,
Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
August 8, 2000
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
CELESTINE PURNELL,
No. 220429
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 97-361854
Respondent-Appellant,
and
MARVIN HAILEY,
Respondent.
Before: Murphy, P.J., and Kelly and Talbot, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the family court order terminating her parental
rights to the minor children under 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. This case is being decided without oral
argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
The family court did not clearly err in finding that the statutory grounds for termination were
established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 5.974; In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337; 445
NW2d 161 (1989). Pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(5); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5) termination of
parental rights was required unless the court found that termination was clearly not in the children’s best
interest. In re Trejo, ___ Mich ___ (No. 112528, issued 7/5/2000) slip op p 27. On this record, we
do not conclude that the court’s finding was clearly erroneous or that termination was clearly not in the
children’s best interest. Accordingly, the court did not err in terminating respondent’s parental right to
the children. Id.
Affirmed.
/s/ William B. Murphy
/s/ Michael J. Kelly
/s/ Michael J. Talbot
-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.
