In Re Tristyn K. - Concurring

Case Number
E2010-00109-COA-R3-PT

I agree with the majority that the absence of any evidence of the requirements of the permanency plan[s] sounds the “death knell” for the trial court’s finding that Mother failed to comply with those requirements. If we do not know what the requirements were – and we clearly do not – we cannot intelligently determine whether those requirements were satisfied or not. I completely concur in the majority’s decision to vacate the trial court’s judgment terminating Mother’s parental rights to the extent that decision is based upon a finding that she failed to substantially comply with the requirements of the plan(s).

Authoring Judge
Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Originating Judge
Chancellor William E. Lantrip
Case Name
In Re Tristyn K. - Concurring
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
This is a dissenting opinion
Download PDF Version