Utah Supreme Court
What standard of review applies to best interest determinations in parental rights termination cases? State ex rel. E.R. Explained
Summary
A mother appealed the termination of her parental rights, arguing the juvenile court exceeded its discretion and that the Court of Appeals applied an inappropriately deferential standard of review. The Utah Supreme Court granted certiorari to clarify the proper standard of review for best interest determinations in termination proceedings.
Analysis
The Utah Supreme Court’s decision in State ex rel. E.R. provides crucial clarity on the standard of review that applies when appellate courts examine juvenile court determinations in termination of parental rights cases, particularly regarding best interest findings.
Background and Facts
DCFS removed E.R. from his mother’s custody in January 2016 after finding dependency. Despite initially setting reunification as the primary goal, the juvenile court terminated reunification services in November 2016 after the mother failed to substantially comply with the reunification plan. A year later, the state petitioned for termination of parental rights. The juvenile court found statutory grounds existed and determined termination was in E.R.’s best interest, noting his “particular aversion to anything court related” and need for stability.
Key Legal Issues
The mother appealed, challenging only the best interest determination. On certiorari, she argued that the deferential State ex rel. B.R. standard should apply only to parental fitness determinations, not best interest findings. Alternatively, she requested the court replace the B.R. standard with de novo review for best interest determinations.
Court’s Analysis and Holding
The Utah Supreme Court rejected both arguments and affirmed. The court held that the B.R. standard applies to all aspects of termination decisions, including best interest determinations. The court analyzed best interest determinations as fact-like mixed questions warranting deferential review because they involve complex, varying facts unique to each case and rely on trial court observations of witness demeanor. However, the court clarified that juvenile courts receive no greater deference than other trial courts, disavowing language in B.R. suggesting heightened deference.
Practice Implications
This decision establishes that appellate courts will overturn juvenile court termination decisions only when they are “against the clear weight of the evidence” or when the court failed to consider all relevant facts. Practitioners should focus appeals on demonstrating that the evidence clearly weighs against the juvenile court’s determination rather than seeking independent appellate review of the merits.
Case Details
Case Name
State ex rel. E.R.
Citation
2021 UT 36
Court
Utah Supreme Court
Case Number
No. 20200163
Date Decided
July 29, 2021
Outcome
Affirmed
Holding
The deferential standard of review established in State ex rel. B.R. applies to all aspects of juvenile court termination decisions, including best interest determinations, and such decisions are overturned only if against the clear weight of the evidence.
Standard of Review
Clear weight of the evidence for fact-intensive mixed questions of law and fact in termination of parental rights proceedings
Practice Tip
When challenging best interest determinations in termination appeals, focus on demonstrating that the juvenile court’s decision was against the clear weight of the evidence rather than arguing for de novo review.
Need Appellate Counsel?
Lotus Appellate Law handles appeals before the Utah Court of Appeals, Utah Supreme Court, California Court of Appeal, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Related Court Opinions
About these Decision Summaries
Lotus Appellate Law publishes these summaries to keep practitioners informed — not as legal advice. Each case turns on its own facts. If a decision here is relevant to your matter, we’re happy to discuss it.