Cited by

An appellate court reviews the district court’s findings in a termination case for clear error, and reviews its decision to terminate for an abuse of discretion.

This court “review[s] the district court’s findings to determine whether they address the statutory criteria for termination of parental rights and are not clearly erroneous.”

A finding is not clearly erroneous unless “it is either manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” -61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).

“[An appellate court] review[s] the district court’s findings to determine whether they address the statutory criteria for termination of parental rights and are not clearly erroneous.”

“A finding is clearly erroneous if it is either manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” –61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).

“A finding is clearly erroneous if it is either manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” -61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).

“A finding is clearly erroneous if it is either manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” –61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).

An appellate court must “review the district court’s findings to determine whether they address the statutory criteria for termination of parental rights and are not clearly erroneous.”

We determine that a district court’s finding is clearly erroneous when “it is either manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” -61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).

“A finding is clearly erroneous if it is either manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” –61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).

“A finding is clearly erroneous if it is either manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” –61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).

We will affirm the district court’s decision to terminate parental rights if one statutory ground is supported by clear and convincing evidence and termination is in the child’s best interests, provided that the county made reasonable efforts to reunite the family

“A finding is clearly erroneous if it is either manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” -61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).

“A finding is clearly erroneous if it is either manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” -61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).

“A finding is clearly erroneous if it is either manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” –61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).

The county “must prove a consistent pattern of specific conduct or specific conditions existing at the time of the hearing that appears will continue for a prolonged, indefinite period and that are permanently detrimental to the welfare of the child.” (quotation omitted).

Lastly, mother argues that this case is similar to d 656 (Minn. 2008).

A finding is clearly erroneous if it is “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” -61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).

Best Interests of the Child An appellate court will affirm a district court’s termination of parental rights if “at least one statutory ground alleged in the petition is supported by clear and convincing evidence and termination of parental rights is in the child’s best interests.” (citations and quotations omitted).

“A finding is clearly erroneous if it is either manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” -61 (Minn. 2008) (quotation omitted).