Preview:

STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS


In the Matter of TYLER ROBERT PARKER, Minor.

VALERI MILLER and GORDON MILLER, Petitioners-Appellees, v JULIE A. MCGINZIE, Respondent-Appellant, and KEVIN CARL PARKER, Respondent.

UNPUBLISHED January 28, 2000

No. 214960 Lapeer Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 00-002532

In the Matter of BRADY CARL PARKER, Minor.

VALERI MILLER and GORDON MILLER, Petitioners-Appellees, v JULIE A. MCGINZIE, Respondent-Appellant, and KEVIN CARL PARKER, No. 215355 Lapeer Circuit Court Family Division LC No. 00-002533

-1

Respondent.

Before: Doctoroff, P.J., and Holbrook, Jr. and Kelly, JJ. PER CURIAM. In these consolidated cases, respondent-appellant (hereinafter "respondent") appeals as of right from the family court's orders terminating her parental rights to her two children, Tyler and Brady. We affirm. First, respondent contends that the family court erred in denying her motion for a directed verdict made at the close of petitioners' proofs. Initially, we note that respondent's designation of her motion as a motion for a directed verdict was a misnomer. Sands Appliance Services v Wilson, 231 Mich App 405, 409; 587 NW2d 814 (1998). A motion for a directed verdict in a nonjury case is more properly termed a motion for involuntary dismissal under MCR 2.504(B)(2). Samuel D Begola Services, Inc v Wild Bros, 210 Mich App 636, 639; 534 NW2d 217 (1995). In ruling on such a motion, the trial court does not view the evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party, as it would when addressing a motion for a directed verdict. Warren v June's Mobile Home Village & Sales, Inc, 66 Mich App 386, 389; 239 NW2d 380 (1976). Instead, it acts as a trier of fact, judges credibility, weighs the evidence, and decides the case on the merits. Id. The trial court's ruling will not be reversed unless it is clearly erroneous. Id. Petitioners argued that respondent's parental rights should be terminated pursuant to MCL 712A.19b(3)(f), (g), and (j); MSA 27.3178(598.19b)(3)(f), (g), and (j). Respondent moved for involuntary dismissal with respect to each of the three grounds for termination. The trial court granted respondent's motion with respect to

Download IN RE BRADY CARL PARKER MINOR.pdf

Michigan Law