Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
IN THE INTEREST OF D.M.
Date: 10-15-2021
Case Number: 21-0314
Judge: Christensen
Court: Iowa Supreme Court on review from the Iowa Court of Appeals on appeal from the Warren County District Court
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Best Indianola Family Law Lawyer Directory
Best Indianola Family Law Lawyer Directory
Defendant's Attorney:
Best Indianola Family Law Lawyer Directory
Best Indianola Family Law Lawyer Directory
Description:
Indianola, IA: Family law lawyers represented the Mother and Father of D.M. in child custody dispute.
A mother and her child's guardian ad litem (GAL) separately appeal the juvenile court's permanency order transferring sole custody of the child, born in 2013, to her father. Both the mother and GAL argue there was not clear and convincing evidence the child could not be returned to the mother's care at the time of the permanency hearing. OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the child could be safely returned to the mother's home during the mother's parenting time under the shared care arrangement but brief transition services may be appropriate. We reverse the juvenile court's permanency determination, and we remand the matter to the district court to enter a permanency order exercising one of the options contained in Iowa Code section 232.104(2)(a) or (b) (2019).
A mother and her child's guardian ad litem (GAL) separately appeal the juvenile court's permanency order transferring sole custody of the child, born in 2013, to her father. Both the mother and GAL argue there was not clear and convincing evidence the child could not be returned to the mother's care at the time of the permanency hearing. OPINION HOLDS: We conclude the child could be safely returned to the mother's home during the mother's parenting time under the shared care arrangement but brief transition services may be appropriate. We reverse the juvenile court's permanency determination, and we remand the matter to the district court to enter a permanency order exercising one of the options contained in Iowa Code section 232.104(2)(a) or (b) (2019).
Outcome:
Reversed and remanded.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of IN THE INTEREST OF D.M.?
The outcome was: Reversed and remanded.
Which court heard IN THE INTEREST OF D.M.?
This case was heard in Iowa Supreme Court on review from the Iowa Court of Appeals on appeal from the Warren County District Court, IA. The presiding judge was Christensen.
Who were the attorneys in IN THE INTEREST OF D.M.?
Plaintiff's attorney: Best Indianola Family Law Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Best Indianola Family Law Lawyer Directory.
When was IN THE INTEREST OF D.M. decided?
This case was decided on October 15, 2021.