IN RE GOULD MINORS
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of SOLOMON GOULD and
DAYSHIN GOULD, a/k/a DAYSHIN
THOMPSON, Minors.
FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY,
UNPUBLISHED
February 15, 2002
Petitioner-Appellee,
v
No. 235449
Washtenaw Circuit Court
Family Division
LC No. 99-024849-NA
LACREADA THOMPSON,
Respondent-Appellant
and
RAYFORD GOULD,
Respondent.
Before: Fitzgerald, P.J., and Hood and Sawyer, JJ.
MEMORANDUM.
Respondent mother appeals from an order of the trial court terminating her parental rights
to the minor children pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(g), (i) and (l). We affirm.
In making a termination decision, the trial court must engage in a two-step analysis.
First, it must determine if a statutory ground for termination has been established by clear and
convincing evidence. In re Sours Minors, 459 Mich 624, 632; 593 NW2d 520 (1999). Second,
if a statutory ground has been established, the trial court must terminate parental rights unless
there exists clear evidence on the whole record that it is not in the child’s best interests to
terminate parental rights. In re Trejo Minors, 462 Mich 341, 354; 603 NW2d 787 (2000).
The Court has carefully reviewed the record on appeal, the opinion of the trial court, and
the parties’ briefs. We are not persuaded that the trial court erred in finding that the statutory
grounds for termination were met and that it was in the best interests of the children to terminate
-1-
the parental rights. Accordingly, we find no abuse of discretion by the trial court in terminating
respondent’s parental rights.
Affirmed.
/s/ E. Thomas Fitzgerald
/s/ Harold Hood
/s/ David H. Sawyer
-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.
