« Ind. Courts - "Order Clarifying Appellate Rule Amendments Effective July 1, 2016" | Main | Courts - "SCOTUS Says Police May Use Evidence Found After Illegal Stops" »

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 1 opinion(s) today (and 7 NFP memorandum decision(s))

For publication opinions today (1):

In In the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of N.C. (Minor Child) and A.C. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, a 12-page opinion, Judge Mathias writes:

A.C. (“Father”) appeals the involuntary termination of his parental rights to his minor son N.C. (“Child”). Father presents one issue, which we restate as whether the American with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) applies in termination proceedings. We affirm. * * *

Father argues that because he is deaf and has cognitive and mental health problems that DCS was required to provide him accommodations under the ADA. He specifically contends that DCS’s failure to accommodate his disability is a defense in this termination proceeding.

Although Father makes this argument on appeal, after review of the record, we cannot agree that he raised this issue before the trial court. Father concedes that he did not specifically mention the ADA issue during the termination hearing, but rather argues that Father’s counsel repeatedly raised the failure of DCS to accommodate his disability.

However, the record is devoid of such statements that Father alleges in his brief. Indiana Appellate Rule 46(A)(8)(a) provides:

The argument must contain the contentions of the appellant on the issues present, supported by cogent reasoning. Each contention must be supported by citations to the authorities, statutes, and the Appendix or parts of the Record on Appeal relied on.
A party waives an issue where the party fails to develop a cogent argument or provide adequate citation to authority and portions of the record. York v. Frederic, 947 N.E.2d 969, 979 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), trans. denied. Further, a party may not raise an issue for the first time on appeal. See In re K.S., 750 N.E.2d 832, 834 n.1 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001). Therefore, the issue is waived for failure to develop an argument supported by cogent reasoning and because it was raised for the first time on appeal.

[The court goes through several additional arguments, and concludes]

For all of these reasons, we conclude that Father waived the issue of whether the ADA applies in a termination of parental rights proceeding. Waiver notwithstanding, Father’s discrimination claim cannot serve as a basis to attack the trial court’s termination order.

NFP civil decisions today (4):

In re the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of N.C., a minor child, and his Father, C.C. v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)

Ed Mitchell v. Keith Smith and Mt. Zion Cemetery (mem. dec.)

Alan L. Stephens, M.D., and Summit Plastic Surgery Center v. Jamie Fazio (mem. dec.)

Nidia Martinez, et al., on Behalf of Herself and Others Similarly Situated v. Stratus Franchising, LLC, et al. (mem. dec.)

NFP criminal decisions today (3):

John Middleton v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Richard Vance Hastings v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Jesse N. Cole v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on June 21, 2016 12:49 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions