IN RE TWIGGS MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of DAT and DLT, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
January 29, 2002
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 230835
Wayne Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 92-297775
ERICA ANDREA THOMAS,
Respondent-Appellant,
and
DAVID ALLEN TWIGGS,
Respondent.
Before: Sawyer, P.J., and O’Connell and Zahra, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent-appellant appeals as of right from the trial court order terminating her
parental rights to the minor children under MCL 712A.19b(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i), (g), (i) and (j). We
affirm. This case is being decided without oral argument pursuant to MCR 7.214(E).
The trial court did not clearly err in finding that §§ 19b(3)(a)(ii), (c)(i), (g), (i) and (j)
were established by clear and convincing evidence. MCR 5.974(I), In re Miller, 433 Mich 331,
337; 445 NW2d 161 (1989). Petitioner-appellee’s evidence established that respondentappellant failed to establish stable housing, failed to benefit from programs offered by the foster
care agency, and failed to visit her children for more than 90 days. Because the evidence did not
show that termination of respondent-appellant’s parental rights was clearly not in the children’s
best interests, the trial court did not err in terminating her parental rights. MCL 712A.19b(5); In
re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341, 356-357; 612 NW2d 407 (2000).
Additionally, we find no record support for respondent-appellant’s claim that her
caseworkers offered her no services and did not aid her in completing the requirements of the
parent/agency agreement. To the contrary, respondent-appellant was offered services and
assistance and either failed to avail herself of these services or failed to show any appreciable
-1-
benefit from the services. Moreover, respondent-appellant’s frequent moves, failure to maintain
contact with caseworkers, and failure to visit the children thwarted the agency’s ability to help
her.
Affirmed.
/s/ David H. Sawyer
/s/ Peter D. O’Connell
/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.
