Narrative Opinion Summary
In this case, two parents, referenced as T.F. and B.P., challenged the termination of their parental rights concerning their daughter, Allie, based on alleged abandonment under Wisconsin Statute 48.415(1)(a)3. The Department of Human Services initiated termination proceedings after Allie was placed in foster care following a CHIPS order. T.F. argued that the Department improperly claimed abandonment given Allie's involuntary removal under a CHIPS order and raised a constitutional challenge, which was not preserved at the circuit court level. Both parents contended there were genuine issues of material fact regarding their good cause defenses for not maintaining contact with Allie. The court affirmed the partial summary judgment against B.P., finding no sufficient factual issues regarding his good cause defense, but reversed the judgment against T.F., remanding for a fact-finding hearing due to unresolved factual disputes. The court interpreted the statute to allow the Department to pursue termination on any grounds of abandonment regardless of whether a CHIPS order was in effect, emphasizing the statutory language and legislative intent. The decision highlights the distinct applications of the statutory subdivisions addressing abandonment and clarifies that involuntary placement under a CHIPS order can meet the statutory requirements for abandonment. Ultimately, the court upheld the termination of B.P.'s parental rights but allowed further proceedings for T.F. to explore her good cause defense.
Legal Issues Addressed
Good Cause Defense in Abandonment under Wisconsin Statute 48.415(1)(c)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court remanded T.F.'s case for a fact-finding hearing due to genuine issues of material fact concerning her good cause defense.
Reasoning: T.F. argues she had good cause for her lack of communication and visits with Allie from January 1 to July 1, 2017. The court finds there is indeed a factual dispute regarding T.F.'s good cause, indicating that the circuit court erred in granting summary judgment on that point.
Interpretation of 'Has Been Left' in Abandonment Casessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court found that a child's placement under a CHIPS order can fulfill the 'has been left' requirement, even if the parent did not voluntarily place the child there.
Reasoning: A child's placement outside a parent's home under a CHIPS order fulfills the 'has been left by the parent with any person' requirement of subdivision 3, regardless of whether the parent actively placed the child, provided the parent is aware of the child's whereabouts and fails to maintain contact.
Summary Judgment in Termination of Parental Rights Casessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Summary judgment was affirmed against B.P. due to insufficient evidence of good cause, whereas T.F.'s case was remanded for further proceedings.
Reasoning: The court had concluded that both T.F. and B.P. failed to present sufficient evidence for good cause under WIS. STAT. 48.415(1)(c).
Termination of Parental Rights under Wisconsin Statute 48.415(1)(a)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court held that the Department could plead any grounds for abandonment, including subdivision 3, even when a CHIPS order is in place.
Reasoning: The statute WIS. STAT. 48.415(1)(a) allows the Department to plead any grounds for abandonment in termination of parental rights (TPR) cases.