This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The Children, Youth, and Families Department (CYFD) filed a petition against the Respondent, alleging abuse and neglect of his children. The Respondent voluntarily relinquished his parental rights, which the district court subsequently terminated. The Respondent later sought to reopen the case and set aside the termination of his parental rights, claiming procedural irregularities and misconduct by CYFD (paras 2-3, 6).
Procedural History
- District Court, December 21, 2018: Judgment terminating Respondent's parental rights.
- District Court, August 24, 2020: Order denying Respondent's petition to reopen the case and set aside the termination of parental rights.
- District Court, September 1, 2021: Order denying Respondent's amended petition to reopen and motion to set aside the termination of parental rights.
Parties' Submissions
- Appellant: Argued that CYFD did not file the initial abuse and neglect petition within the required timeline and alleged fraud and perjury by CYFD, claiming these actions violated his constitutional rights (para 6).
- Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]
Legal Issues
- Whether the district court abused its discretion in denying the Respondent's motions to reconsider the order denying the reopening of the case and setting aside the termination of parental rights.
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision to deny the Respondent's motions to reconsider (para 8).
Reasons
Per Duffy J. (Hanisee and Bogardus JJ. concurring): The Court found that the Respondent's motions to reconsider were untimely and thus treated as Rule 1-060(B) motions, which are reviewed for abuse of discretion. The Court determined that the Respondent failed to establish any legal or factual basis to support the withdrawal of his relinquishment of parental rights. The Court also noted that the Respondent's claims regarding CYFD's actions were not properly before the court as they were not raised in the Rule 1-060(B) motions (paras 5-7).