Preview:

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT Autumn Dusk Halaschak Indiana Dep't of Child Services, LaPorte County Michigan City, In diana Robert Henke Indiana Dep't of Child Services, Central Admin. Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE LAPORTE CIRCUIT COURT Nancy L. Gettinger, Magistrate Michigan City, Indiana

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE LAPORTE COUNTY CASA David. K. Payne Braje, Nelson & James Michigan City, Indiana

______________________________________________________________________________

FILED
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

Indiana Supreme Court
_________________________________ No. 46S04-0904-JV-160

In the

Apr 17 2009, 11:00 am

CLERK

IN RE T.S., A CHILD IN NEED OF SERVICES

INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SERVICES, LAPORTE COUNTY, v. LAPORTE CIRCUIT COURT, AND LAPORTE COUNTY CASA _________________________________

Appellant,

Appellees.

Expedited Appeal from the LaPorte Circuit Court, No. 46C01-0804-JC-48 The Honorable Thomas Alevizos, Judge The Honorable Nancy L. Gettinger, Magistrate _________________________________ On Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 46A04-0902-JV-78 _________________________________ April 17, 2009 Dickson, Justice.

To provide an orderly and expedited procedure for appellate review of certain juvenile court decisions about placement recommendations made by the Indiana Department of Child

Services ("DCS"), this Court promulgated Indiana Appellate Rule 14.1, which became effective January 1, 2009. Today's case presents the first appeal received under this new rule.

We hold that: (1) Rule 14.1 expedited appeals are available to the process of modifying dispositional decrees regarding child placement where a juvenile court does not follow DCS's recommendation, (2) the juvenile court must accept DCS's placement recommendations unless it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the recommendation is "unreasonable" or "contrary to the welfare and best interests of the child," (3) a finding by the juvenile court that DCS's recommendation is unreasonable or contrary to the child's welfare and best interests is reviewed on appeal for clear error, and (4) the juvenile court's placement determination in this case was not clearly erroneous.

T.S., a child, was removed from his mother's care because of allegations of physical abuse, found to be a Child in Need of Services ("CHINS"), and placed with his half-brother, K.S., in the foster home of K.S.'s paternal grandparents. After several months, DCS requested that T.S. be reunited, but the LaPorte Circuit Court, exercising jurisdiction as a juvenile court, decided it would be contrary to T.S.'s best interests to follow DCS's recommendation and immediately return him to his mother's care. The juvenile court found that T.S. should remain with the foster parents until the end of the school year.

DCS appealed the juvenile court's decision pursuant to Appellate Rule 14.1, challenging the court's placement order and contending that its recommendations had been neither unreasonable, based on the facts and circumstances of the case, nor contrary to the welfare or best interests of the child. Both the juvenile court and the Court Appointed Special Advocate ("CASA") responded in support of the juvenile court's decision. The CASA also filed a motion in the Court of Appeals to dismiss the appeal on grounds that the juvenile court's decision was not within the category of rulings appealable under Appellate Rule 14.1. The Court of Appeals held that the juvenile court's ruling was subject to Appellate Rule 14.1 but found that the juvenile court "did not abuse its discretion in rejecting DCS's placement recommendation." In re T.S., 902 N.E.2d 332, 333 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). DCS sought transfer, asserting that the Court of Appeals used the incorrect standard of appellate review. We granted transfer.

2

This expedited appeal of the juvenile court's determination thus presents this Court with three issues: (1) whether the juvenile court's order rejecting DCS's placement recommendation is eligible for expedited appeal under Rule 14.1, (2) what is the appropriate appellate standard of review applicable for such expedited appeals, and (3) whether the juvenile court properly rejected DCS's recommendation to immediately return T.S. to his mother's custody.

As to whether the juvenile court's decision was appealable under Rule 14.1, we agree with DCS and the Court of Appeals that it was. Rule 14.1 provides that orders entered under Indiana Code

Download In Re: T.S.; Indiana Dept. of Child Services, LaPorte County v. LaPorte County C

Indiana Law