Dept. of Human Services v. J. M.

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Family Law
  • Date Filed: 12-09-2015
  • Case #: A157618
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Egan, J. For the Court; Armstrong, P.J; Hadlock, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

To support juvenile court jurisdiction following a motion to dismiss, the court must find that there is a current threat of serious loss or injury to the child and a reasonable likelihood that the threat will be realized, with burden on DHS. The risk of harm must be non-speculative and present at the time of the hearing.

This was a juvenile dependency case, the father and mother appealed a corrected permanency judgment that changed the permanency plan for parents’ child, from reunification to adoption. Parents moved to dismiss jurisdiction and terminate the wardship. At the hearing, the juvenile court denied parents’ motion to dismiss and changed the plan to adoption based on two jurisdictional allegations: first, that child sustained an unexplained fracture to her tibia—while in parents’ care and, second, that parents’ lack of parenting skills made them unable to provide adequate care. Parents assigned error to both the court’s denial of their motion to dismiss and the court’s decision to change the plan, arguing that the evidence was not legally sufficient. The Department of Human Services (DHS) responded that the evidence was legally sufficient. The Court agreed with DHS. Affirmed.

Advanced Search