Matter of T.R.

Annotate this Case

Matter of T.R.
1986 WY 182
726 P.2d 500
Case Number: 86-174
Decided: 10/08/1986
Supreme Court of Wyoming

In the Matter of the Parental Rights to T.R. and J.S., a/k/a J.T.S., Minors. P.R., a/k/a P.S., Appellant, (Respondent),

v.

Charles W. SHANNON, Director of the Department of Public Assistance and Social Services in and for Big Horn County, Appellee (Petitioner).

Appeal from District Court, Big Horn County, John T. Dixon, J.

John W. Davis, Davis, Donnell, Worrall & Bancroft, P.C., Worland, for appellant (respondent).

A.G. McClintock, Atty. Gen., Peter J. Mulvaney, Deputy Atty. Gen., and Richard E. Dixon, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee (petitioner).

Before, THOMAS, C.J., and BROWN, CARDINE, URBIGKIT and MACY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

[¶1.]     An appeal from a parental-termination decision for two young children initiated by the Big Horn County Department of Assistance and Social Services, is now before this court by brief of the appellant mother, and confession of error by the Attorney General.

[¶2.]     Expressly contrary to Matter of Parental Rights to Child X, Wyo., 617 P.2d 1078 (1980), and provisions of § 14-3-211(a), W.S. 1977, 1986 Replacement, as therein construed, no guardian ad litem for the children was appointed to represent the minors' best interest in the parental-rights termination litigation.

[¶3.]     Consistent with our earlier decision, this court in noting that the proceedings below were fatally defective remands the case to the district court where a guardian ad litem shall be appointed and a new trial conducted.

[¶4.]     This jurisdictional disposition does not invoke analysis or consideration by this court of substantive evidentiary issues discussed in the brief by the appellant to which the State did not have an opportunity to respond. Those concerns can be comprehensively reconsidered at retrial, with benefit of the additional briefing and review by the litigants.

[¶5.]     Reversed and remanded for retrial.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.