In re Interest of Le Antonae D. et al.

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF versionPDF version

In re Interest of Le Antonae D. et al.

Case Number
Call Date
February 11, 2020
Case Time
1:00 PM
Case Summary

-19-703, In re Interest of LeAntonaé D. et al.

Douglas County, Juvenile Court, Judge Elizabeth G. Crnkovich

Attorney for Appellant: Peder Bartling (Bartling Law Offices, P.C., L.L.O.)

Attorneys for Appellee: Mark Hanna (Deputy Douglas County Attorney) & Emily Medcalf (Senior Certified Law Clerk)

Juvenile Action: Permanency disposition

Action Taken by Juvenile Court: The five children were adjudicated on various dates to be within the meaning of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-247(3)(a) (Reissue 2016), because they lacked proper parental care by reason of the faults or habits of their mother. Subsequently, in an order filed on May 21, 2019, the separate juvenile court of Douglas County did not adopt the recommendations of the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), including but not limited to, the permanency plan of reunification of the children with their mother, and the court found that no more reasonable efforts would be required in this matter. The juvenile court returned the case to DHHS for alternative permanency planning recommendations. No appeal was filed following this order. At a hearing on June 20, evidence was received showing that DHHS recommended the permanency objective be changed to adoption pending the filing of a petition for the termination of the mother’s parental rights; and in its order on June 21, the court stated the permanency objective was adoption. The mother appealed following the June 21 order.

Assignments of Error on Appeal: The mother assigns the juvenile court erred (1) “by failing to order a rehabilitation plan for [her] which precluded the mother in interest from effectuating her constitutional right to raise her children, the juveniles in interest”; (2) “in determining, by clear and convincing evidence, that any exception that § 43-283.01(4)(a)-(c) sets forth existed”; and (3) “by failing to hold the hearing that § 43-283.01(6) requires in the event that any such exception exists.”

Case Location
Court Type
Separate Juvenile Court
Schedule Code
Panel Text
Pirtle, Riedmann, and Bishop, Judges