MATTER OF J L F H A F
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 80-454 I N THE SUPREME COURT O THE STATE OF M N A A F OTN 1981 I N THE MATTER OF J. L. F. a n d H. A. F. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court of t h e T h i r t e e n t h J u d i c i a l District, I n a n d f o r t h e County o f Y e l l o w s t o n e , The I i o n o r a b l e Diane G. B a r z , J u d g e p r e s i d i n g . C o u n s e l o f Record: For Appellant: P e t e r s o n Law O f f i c e s , B i l l i n g s , Montana F o r Respondent : H a r o l d H a n s e r , County A t t o r n e y , B i l l i n g s , Montana O l s e n , C h r i s t e n s e n & G a n n e t t , B i l l i n g s , Montana S u b m i t t e d on B r i e f s : Decided : -Filed : WPR c 6" ' - l$M 7 F e b r u a r y 25, 1 9 8 1 APR 6 -~aa Mr. J u s t i c e Gene B. D a l y d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n o f t h e C o u r t . T h i s a p p e a l a r i s e s from a c u s t o d i a l h e a r i n g h e l d t h e Y e l l o w s t o n e County D i s t r i c t C o u r t , G. Barz p r e s i d i n g . in t h e Honorable Diane The c a s e was t r i e d on t h e p e t i t i o n o f t h e S t a t e D e p a r t m e n t o f S o c i a l and R e h a b i l i t a t i o n S e r v i c e s (SRS) t o h a v e JLF and HAF d e c l a r e d y o u t h s i n need o f c a r e and to have their permanent care, custody and control awarded t o t h e S t a t e o f Montana w i t h a u t h o r i t y t o c o n s e n t t o their adoption. The natural mother h e a r i n g and r e p r e s e n t e d by c o u n s e l . JLF predeceased was present at the The p u t a t i v e f a t h e r o f t h e h e a r i n g , and t h e p u t a t i v e f a t h e r o f HAF was s e r v e d w i t h l e g a l n o t i c e o f t h e p r o c e e d i n g b u t f a i l e d t o appear. Court F o l l o w i n g t h e h e a r i n g on t h e p e t i t i o n , t h e D i s t r i c t granted the relief judgment a c c o r d i n g l y . a boy, JLF, time, h i s mother, unmarried and requested by SRS and entered The n a t u r a l m o t h e r now a p p e a l s . was b o r n on J a n u a r y 7 , 1974. A t that t h e a p p e l l a n t , was s i x t e e n y e a r s o f a g e , living with her mother. JLF and a p p e l l a n t remained i n her m o t h e r ' s house f o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y s i x months before moving into their own apartment. Appellant's i n d e p e n d e n t l i v i n g a r r a n g e m e n t , h o w e v e r , was o n l y t e m p o r a r y , and she s o o n moved back with her mother. This moving c o n t i n u e d f o r t h e n e x t few y e a r s - - a p p e l l a n t out of her numerous mother's occasions. house, During changing this her period, pattern i n and residence appellant on of t e n c a l l e d upon h e r m o t h e r t o p r o v i d e b a b y s i t t i n g s e r v i c e s , in a d d i t i o n t o placing JLF with her of time for extended p e r i o d s . I n May 1977 a p p e l l a n t s u f f e r e d a n e r v o u s breakdown and was a d m i t t e d t o t h e p s y c h i a t r i c ward o f t h e Deaconess Hospital in Billings, Montana. A p p e l l a n t was h o s p i t a l i z e d f o r s i x weeks a f t e r which s h e was r e l e a s e d t o a l o c a l m e n t a l h e a l t h g r o u p home f o r e i g h t a d d i t i o n a l weeks. of t h e breakdown, whereby a verbal appellant grandmother a g r e e m e n t was r e a c h e d w i t h SRS allowed JLF it until determined was a result As to stay with that his maternal appellant could adequately provide for h i s care. A p p e l l a n t was r e h o s p i t a l i z e d d u e t o h e r m e n t a l h e a l t h in October 1977 continued to and again remain grandmother. in November primarily A p p e l l a n t was in 1978; the thus, care again hospitalized of for JLF his mental h e a l t h r e a s o n s i n A u g u s t 1 9 7 9 , a f t e r becoming p r e g n a n t w i t h t h e i n f a n t HAF. HAF was concerned baby, over born 5, 1980. ability to February appellant's Because care for SRS a was newborn t e m p o r a r y i n v e s t i g a t i v e a u t h o r i t y was a p p l i e d f o r and g r a n t e d on F e b r u a r y 6 , 1 9 8 0 . The i n f a n t HAF was p l a c e d i n a f o s t e r home upon h e r r e l e a s e from t h e h o s p i t a l . JLF, now s i x y e a r s o f h i s grandmother. age, continued t o r e s i d e with I n March 1 9 8 0 , h o w e v e r , a p p e l l a n t demanded t h a t he be r e t u r n e d t o h e r c u s t o d y . legal custody or control at the Not h a v i n g any t y p e o f time, the SRS c a s e w o r k e r r e t u r n e d JLF t o h i s m o t h e r ' s home on a s u p e r v i s e d b a s i s . I n A p r i l 1980 SRS f i l e d t h e p e t i t i o n t o h a v e JLF and HAF declared petition remained was youths held under supervised basis. judgment was in in the need July care of care. 1980. of A During appellant hearing this on a on the time JLF continued The p e t i t i o n was e v e n t u a l l y g r a n t e d , entered on September 24, p e r m a n e n t c a r e , c u s t o d y and c o n t r o l o f 1980, awarding and the the children t o the S t a t e o f Montana. The s o l e District Court parental issue presented abused rights of its on appeal discretion appellant and is whether terminating by the the awarding the permanent c a r e , c u s t o d y and c o n t r o l o f J L F and HAF t o t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f S o c i a l and R e h a b i l i t a t i o n S e r v i c e s . This Court has held t h a t t h e burden of proof in a t e r m i n a t i o n o f p a r e n t a l r i g h t s a c t i o n i s upon t h e S t a t e t o p r o v e by c l e a r and c o n v i n c i n g e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n a t i s s u e a r e abused o r n e g l e c t e d . , Mont. See Matter 594 P.2d 1 1 2 7 , 36 S t . R e p . of J L B 896. (1979), This Court, however, h a s a l s o s t a t e d t h a t t h e p r i m a r y d u t y of d e c i d i n g t h e proper custody of a c h i l d r e s t s with t h e D i s t r i c t Court. All that reasonable presumptions court's concerning determination w i l l the be made, c o r r e c t n e s s of and t h e d e c i s i o n w i l l n o t be d i s t u r b e d on a p p e a l u n l e s s i t i s shown t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t Court c l e a r l y abused i t s d i s c r e t i o n . (197911 Mont . , M a t t e r o f LFG 598 P.2d 1 1 2 5 , 36 S t . R e p . 1547; I n r e G o r e ( 1 9 7 7 ) , 174 Mont. 3 2 1 , 570 P.2d 1 1 1 0 . H e r e , t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o u n d t h a t J L F and HAF w e r e y o u t h s i n need o f c a r e and t e r m i n a t e d t h e p a r e n t a l r i g h t s o f appellant. The D i s t r i c t C o u r t b a s e d t h i s d e t e r m i n a t i o n on a f i n d i n g t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n w e r e n e g l e c t e d and a b u s e d . In support considerable of evidence the was District Court's presented, findings, including the following: Dr. M a r i a n F. M a r t i n , a c l i n i c a l p s y c h o l o g i s t who h a s been t r e a t i n g J L F , t e s t i f i e d t h a t when t h e c h i l d was p l a c e d i n t h e c u s t o d y o f a p p e l l a n t i n March 1980 h e began t o show s i g n s of emotional d e t e r i o r a t i o n . Dr. M a r t i n o b s e r v e d t h a t a p a s t p r o b l e m w i t h e n c o p r e s i s had i n c r e a s e d and t h a t JLF had become f i d g e t y , d i s t r a c t i b l e , s u l l e n and w i t h d r a w n . She a l s o o b s e r v e d t h a t J L F was n o t k e p t c l e a n and had a s t r o n g odor d u e t o t h e e n c o p r e s i s . Dr. Martin, a l t h o u g h s h e had limited contact with appellant, further t e s t i f i e d t h a t since appellant was failing to provide for the emotional and p h y s i c a l n e e d s o f J L F , s h e would a l s o b e u n a b l e t o m e e t t h e n e e d s o f h e r newborn b a b y , H A F . Dr. Ned Tranel, a clinical psychologist who held t h r e e d i f f e r e n t s e s s i o n s w i t h a p p e l l a n t b e t w e e n J a n u a r y 1980 and F e b r u a r y 1 9 8 0 , t e s t i f i e d t h a t a p p e l l a n t was d i a g n o s e d a s a pseudo neurotic schizophrenic and c o n d i t i o n may e v e n t u a l l y s t a b i l i z e , any i m p r o v e m e n t s c o u l d be made. opinion that disfunction overall appellant due to condition, was drug she that, her i t was n o t l i k e l y t h a t Dr. T r a n e l was a l s o o f t h e suffering abuses would although and, not from as be a able minimal result to brain of her accurately comprehend o r r e s p o n d t o t h e n e e d s o f h e r c h i l d r e n . should It be c r e d i b i l i t y o f Dr. noted that appellant attacks the T r a n e l by p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t i n F e b r u a r y 1980 h e i n d i c a t e d t h a t a p p e l l a n t m i g h t be c a p a b l e o f r a i s i n g one, b u t n o t both, however, that of h e r c h i l d r e n . he was merely Dr. T r a n e l t e s t i f i e d , speculating about the p o s s i b i l i t y o f a p p e l l a n t r a i s i n g b o t h c h i l d r e n and t h a t a t the time he ability to still raise had considerable e v e n one c h i l d , misgivings about her a l t h o u g h i t was w o r t h a try. A l i c e N i c k o l o f f , t h e c o u n t y s o c i a l worker a s s i g n e d t o work with observations the of family, JLF's concurred with deterioration. Dr. Martin's Nickoloff also attested to appellant's physical and emotional inability to needs her of provide for the children. In p a r t i c u l a r , s h e n o t e d a d i s i n t e r e s t by a p p e l l a n t i n g e t t i n g o u t of bed t o p r e p a r e J L F ' s m e a l s , him o f f t o school. t o c l e a n him o r t o g e t S h e was a l s o o f the opinion, although n o t r e c a l l i n g any s p e c i f i c i n c i d e n t bad enough t o remove t h e child on the spot, that JLF was being neglected, if not abused. The she had behavior children's observed towards maternal appellant JLF on grandmother engage in several testified physically different that abusive occasions. Examples o f s u c h b e h a v i o r i n c l u d e d t h e e x c e s s i v e s t r i k i n g o f t h e c h i l d w i t h a b e l t and a b o a r d , as w e l l as pulling his h a i r and b i t i n g him a s m e t h o d s o f i m p o s i n g d i s c i p l i n e . grandmother further testified that appellant failed The to p r o p e r l y f e e d , c l o t h e and s u p e r v i s e t h e c h i l d . S e c t i o n 41-3-102, MCA, d e f i n e s abused o r neglected a s follows: " ( 2 ) An ' a b u s e d o r n e g l e c t e d c h i l d ' means a c h i l d whose n o r m a l p h y s i c a l o r m e n t a l h e a l t h o r w e l f a r e is harmed o r t h r e a t e n e d w i t h harm by t h e a c t s o r o m i s s i o n s o f h i s p a r e n t o r other person responsible f o r h i s welfare. " ( 3 ) 'Harm t o a c h i l d ' s h e a l t h o r w e l f a r e ' means t h e harm t h a t o c c u r s whenever t h e parent or other person responsible for t h e c h i l d ' s welfare: " ( a ) i n f l i c t s o r a l l o w s t o be i n f l i c t e d upon the child physical or mental injury, including i n j u r i e s s u s t a i n e d a s a r e s u l t of e x c e s s i v e c o r p o r a l punishment; "(b) ... " ( c ) causes f a i l u r e t o t h r i v e or otherwise f a i l s t o s u p p l y t h e c h i l d w i t h a d e q u a t e food or f a i l s t o supply clothing, shelter, e d u c a t i o n , or h e a l t h c a r e , though f i n a n c i a l l y a b l e t o do s o o r o f f e r e d f i n a n c i a l o r o t h e r r e a s o n a b l e means t o d o s o ; " ( 8 ) ' M e n t a l i n j u r y ' means a n i d e n t i f i a b l e and s u b s t a n t i a l i m p a i r m e n t o f t h e c h i l d ' s i n t e l l e c t u a l or psychological functioning." Based relation normal upon examination of the offered evidence, t o t h e d e c l a r e d p o l i c y of childhood development this and to State in t o promote provide for the p r o t e c t i o n o f c h i l d r e n whose h e a l t h and w e l f a r e a r e , o r may be, a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t e d by t h e c o n d u c t o f t h o s e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r c a r e , t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t f o u n d J L F and HAF a b u s e d or neglected reviewing as the substantial those terms this record, credible Court's conclusion, are Court evidence and, t h u s , defined now to above. finds support the Upon there is District a c l e a r a b u s e of d i s c r e t i o n h a s n o t been e s t a b l i s h e d . The judgment o f t h e D i s t r i c t ~ o u r f ~ a fs i r m e d . i f ' 2 i Justice C "
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
