Title: Interest of D.D.
Citation: 2015 ND 24
Docket Number: 
State: north-dakota
Issuer: north-dakota Supreme Court
Date: February 12, 2015

Interest of D.D. Annotate this Case Court Description: A district court judgment terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2014 ND 24 In the Interest of D.D., minor child McKenzie County Social Services, Petitioner and Appellee v. D.D., child; H.D., child; C.R., mother; D.D., father, Respondents C.R., mother, Appellant No. 20140456 In the Interest of H.D., minor child McKenzie County Social Services, Petitioner and Appellee v. D.D., child; H.D., child; C.R., mother; D.D., father, Respondents C.R., mother, Appellant No. 20140457 In the Interest of D.D., minor child McKenzie County Social Services, Petitioner and Appellee v. D.D., child; H.D., child; C.R., mother; D.D., father, Respondents D.D., father, Appellant No. 20140465 In the Interest of H.D., minor child McKenzie County Social Services, Petitioner and Appellee v. D.D., child; H.D., child; C.R., mother; D.D., father, Respondents D.D., father, Appellant No. 20140466 Appeals from the Juvenile Court of McKenzie County, Northwest Judicial District, the Honorable Robin Ann Schmidt, Judge. AFFIRMED. Per Curiam. Charles Burke Neff, Assistant State's Attorney, 201 5th Street NW, Suite 550, Watford City, ND 58854, for petitioner and appellee. Ashley Marie Gulke, P.O. Box 931, Minot, ND 58702, for appellant C.R. Richard Robert William Sand, 340 North Main, P.O. Box 1933, Watford City, ND 58854-1933, for appellant D.D. Interest of D.D.Nos. 20140456-20140457 and 20140465-20140466 Per Curiam. [¶1] C.R., mother, and D.D., father, of minor children D.D. and H.D., each appeal from the district court amended order terminating their parental rights. C.R. argues the district court lacked clear and convincing evidence that deprivation was likely to continue and that the children likely would suffer harm absent termination of parental rights. D.D., father, argues the district court erred when it found the causes of deprivation are likely to continue and that reasonable efforts were made to reunify the family after the children were removed. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). [¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J. Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Carol Ronning Kapsner Dale V. Sandstrom