Texas Department of Family and Protective Services v, D.V.

Austin, Texas, family law lawyer represent Defendant in a parental termination action.



As future-Chief Justice Pope explained for the Court nearly half a century ago, for example, "[a]ctions which break the ties between a parent and child can never be justified without the most solid and substantial reasons," and so "in an action which permanently sunders those ties," the "proceedings [should] be strictly scrutinized." Wiley v. Spratlan, 543 S.W.2d 349, 352 (Tex. 1976) (internal quotation omitted). Likewise, "[t]his court has always recognized the strong presumption that the best interest of a minor is usually served by keeping custody in the natural parents." Id. After all, "[t]he natural right which exists between parents and their children is one of constitutional dimensions." Id. Like the U.S. Supreme Court, this Court has repeatedly recognized that a "parental rights termination proceeding encumbers a value 'far more precious than any property right' and is consequently governed by special rules." In re E.R., 385 S.W.3d 552, 555 (Tex. 2012) (quoting Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 758 (1982)). Among them is the constitutional requirement, subsequently codified by statute, see, e.g., Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001(b), that "the evidence in support of termination must be clear and convincing before a court may involuntarily terminate a parent's rights," Holick v. Smith, 685 S.W.2d 18, 20 (Tex. 1985). The gravity of the rights at issue are of such importance that the government provides lawyers for parents, see Tex. Fam. Code § 107.013(a), which is otherwise practically unheard of in civil litigation. Parents also benefit from an otherwise-inapplicable elevated standard of appellate review. In re N.G., 577 S.W.3d 230, 235 (Tex. 2019). Page after page could be filled with these and other powerful observations.



* * *



Legal issue Can a court terminate parental rights when the Department of Family and Protective Services has unequivocally stated it does not seek termination?



FAMILY LAW. PARENTAL RIGHTS TERMINATION. The case examines whether a court can terminate parental rights when the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, through a designated representative's unequivocal and unrepudiated assertion, withdraws its request for termination as a form of relief.



FAMILY LAW. ROLE OF DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES. The judgment discusses the authority of a designated representative to express the Department's position regarding the termination of parental rights and the implications of such an expression being uncontradicted by legal counsel.



CIVIL PROCEDURE. ABANDONMENT OF CLAIMS. The case analyzes the conditions under which a claim for termination of parental rights is considered abandoned in civil litigation and the necessary steps for the Department to effectively withdraw such a claim.



CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. PARENTAL RIGHTS AND DUE PROCESS. The court addresses the elevated standards and procedural safeguards necessary in parental rights termination proceedings, emphasizing the constitutional protections afforded to parental rights.

Key Phrases Abandonment of termination. Parental rights. Department's designated representative. Sole managing conservator. Best interest of the child.

Reversed.