IN RE ROBINSON MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of GR and JR, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
November 3, 2000
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 225588
Macomb Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 96-042231-NA
GEORGE ROBINSON,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
LINDA ROBINSON,
Respondent.
In the Matter of GR and JR, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 225591
Macomb Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 96-042231-NA
LINDA ROBINSON,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
-1
GEORGE ROBINSON,
Respondent.
Before: Gribbs, P.J., and Kelly and Hoekstra, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
In Docket No. 225588, respondent-appellant George Robinson appeals as of right from the
September 10, 1999 order terminating his 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). In Docket No. 225591,
respondent-appellant Linda Robinson appeals as of right from the September 10, 1999 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). These cases have been consolidated for appellate review. We
affirm.
We review for clear error both the court’s decision that a ground for termination has been
proven by clear and convincing evidence and, where appropriate, the court’s decision regarding the
child’s best interest. In re Trejo, ___ Mich ___; ___ NW2d ___ (Docket No. 112528, issued
07/05/00). We find that the family court did not clearly err in finding that statutory grounds for
termination were established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 5.974(I); In re Sours, 459 Mich
624; 593 NW2d 520 (1999). Moreover, the family court did not clearly err in determining that
termination of respondents’ parental rights was in the children’s best interest. MCL 712A.19b(5);
MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(5); In re Trejo, supra.
Affirmed.
/s/ Roman S. Gribbs
/s/ Michael J. Kelly
/s/ Joel P. Hoekstra
-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.
