IN RE WILSON/GALLANT MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
__________________________________________
In the Matter of CECILLY WILSON and DRAKE
GALLANT, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
December 21, 2001
Petitioner-Appellee,
V
No. 231801
Jackson Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 99-096137-NA
JACKI HATHAWAY,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
JASON WILSON and ERIK GALLANT,
Respondents.
Before: Doctoroff, P.J., and Bandstra, C.J. and Wilder, J.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent appeals as of right from the trial court order terminating her parental rights to
the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) and (g). We affirm. This case is being decided
without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
Respondent’s first involvement with the FIA was in October 1, 1999, when the FIA filed
a petition seeking temporary custody of CW and DW. After respondent agreed to seek assistance
finding a home and agreed to a limited guardianship for her children, this petition was withdrawn
on November 8, 1999. Nonetheless, on November 24, 1999, because respondent continually
failed to maintain a stable living environment for herself and her children or provide proper care
for her children, the FIA again filed a petition for temporary custody of CW and DW. Because
these conditions continued to exist as of October 10, 2000, the FIA filed a petition for
termination of parental rights under MCL 712A.19b(3)(c)(i) and (g).
1
Following the termination hearing, the trial court concluded that the statutory grounds for
termination were established by clear and convincing evidence, In re Miller, 433 Mich 331, 337;
445 NW2d 161 (1989); MCR 5.974(1), and that the evidence did not show that termination of
respondent’s parental rights was clearly not in the children’s best interests. In re Trejo, 462 Mich
341, 356-257; 612 NW2d 407 (2000). Because we are unable to find clear error in these
findings, we are unable to conclude that the trial court erred when it terminated respondent’s
parental rights. In re Trejo, supra; In re Miller, supra.
Affirmed.
/s/ Martin M. Doctoroff
/s/ Richard A. Bandstra
/s/ Kurtis T. Wilder
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.
