On Point blog, page 58 of 58
TPR – Substantive Due Process
Dane Co. DHS v. P.P., 2005 WI 32, affirming unpublished decision
Issue: Whether § 48.424(4) (2001-02) on its face violates substantive due process, in failing to require an individualized determination of unfitness as a precondition for termination of parental rights.
Holding: A parent has a fundamental liberty interest at stake in parenting his or her children, and thus the TPR scheme must be narrowly tailored to advance the State’s interest in interfering with that right,
TPR – Substitution of Judge
Brown County DHS v. Terrance M., 2005 WI App 57
Issue/Holding:
¶11. The trial court ruled and the County now argues that Terrance’s substitution request was untimely because it was not filed before “hearing of any preliminary contested matters” under Wis. Stat. § 801.58. Terrance argues the applicable statute is Wis. Stat. § 48.29, which allows a request “either before or during the plea hearing ….”
TPR – Issue Preclusion, Applicability of Doctrine
Brown County DHS v. Terrance M., 2005 WI App 57
Issue/Holding: Because TPR cases are generally a subset of custody cases; and because claim preclusion is available as a means of discouraging groundless requests for modification of custody, both claim and issue preclusion “may also be applied when the facts so require” in TPRs, ¶¶8-9. (The court remands for determination of whether issue preclusion is appropriate in this instance,
Judicial Substitution – TPR, § 48.29
Brown County DHS v. Terrance M., 2005 WI App 57
For Terrance M.: Theresa J. Schmieder
Issue/Holding:
¶11. The trial court ruled and the County now argues that Terrance’s substitution request was untimely because it was not filed before “hearing of any preliminary contested matters” under Wis. Stat. § 801.58. Terrance argues the applicable statute is Wis. Stat. § 48.29, which allows a request “either before or during the plea hearing ….”
Grounds — Denial of Physical Placement: § 48.356(2) Warnings in Underlying Order Unnecessary
Kimberly S.S. v. Sebastian X.L., 2004 WI App 83
Issue: Whether § 48.415(4) requires proof that an underlying family court order denying physical placement contained the warnings required by § 48.356(2).
Holding:
¶7. The plain language of Wis. Stat. § 48.415(4) requires proof that the notices in Wis. Stat. § 48.356(2) were provided only when the underlying order was issued in juvenile court.
Judicial Substitution/Recusal – TPR – Multiple Requests
State ex rel. Julie A.B. v. Circuit Court, 2002 WI App 220
For Julie A.B.: Roberta A. Heckes
Issue/Holding: § 48.29(1) permits more than one party to file a request for a substitution of judge in a TPR proceeding, ¶2. (The mother filed a substitution request. After a new judge was assigned, the GAL filed a request, one that the mother unsuccessfully challenges as unauthorized.)