COURT OF APPEALS
Here is the COA decision, you can read the complete .pdf file HERE.
The Court orders that the motions for immediate consideration are GRANTED.
Pursuant to MCR 7.205(0)(2), in lieu of granting the application for leave to appeal, the Court orders that the March 5, 2007 order of the trial court is REVERSED. Where there was evidence that the adoption was proceeding at the time of the review hearing, the court erred in finding that reasonable efforts were not made to place the children for adoption in a timely manner. The court also erred in placing the children with their maternal grandparents without conducting a review of the best interests of the children. MCt 710.22(g). The court further erred in attempting to revoke its commitment of the children to the Department of Human Services, since such a commitment, once made, is irrevocable. In the matter of Griffin, 88 Mich App 184 (1979). The commitment to the Department of Human Services is reinstated, and the children are to be returned to the foster mother forthwith. We do not retain jurisdiction.
The motion for stay and motion to waive MCR 7.209 requirements are DENIED as
moot.
Pursuant to MCR 7.2 I 5(F)(2), this order is given immediate effect
In this segment I am going to discuss the snow job the adoption agency, DHS/MCI and the Attorney General pulled to make the COA come to this conclusion.
"Where there was evidence that the adoption was proceeding at the time of the review hearing, the court erred in finding that reasonable efforts were not made to place the children for adoption in a timely manner."
The adoption agency, DHS/MCI and the Attorney General used these contact, which was supplied by the adoption agency, for the foster to make the COA believe there was progress being made for the adoption of Alyssa and Amber.
These are the contacts/actions that were made during our adoption assessment, HERE. These are the contacts/actions the adoption agency supplied for the fosters assessment for the COA. The list is HERE.
The adoption agency used 22 of the contacts from our adoption assessment for the foster and HERE is the list that would remain with those 22 contacts/actions deleted from the fosters assessment. Our adoption assessment was completed October 26, 2006, the foster didn't start her adoption assessment until many months later.
Read the court transcripts from August 9, 2006 HERE, the court transcripts from November 8, 2006 HERE and the adoption progress report for December 19, 2006 HERE, you will notice the foster is only considering the adoption at the most in December. I deleted the contacts prior to December 19, 2006 an the list is HERE.
American Heritage Dictionary - considering
To think carefully about. To look at thoughtfully.
American Heritage Dictionary - interested
Involvement with or participation in something
When we started our adoption process with the adoption agency all the papers were signed the same day IE, the adoption application and we signed the papers so background checks could be done with law enforcement. If a person was to use our adoption process as a template it is safe to say the foster also signed all the papers the same day. The foster and her boyfriend signed the papers so background checks could be done on January 31, 2007. The foster also signed the adoption subsidy papers on January 31, 2007 so it is safe to say the foster also signed the adoption application on the same day as the other papers.
Now it you were to look again at the original contact/action list HERE for the foster. You will notice the only personal contact was made August 8, 2006. There is no mention of the fosters boyfriend other than the court hearing of February, 7, 2007. Our contention is this; the adoption agency wouldn't start using contacts/actions until they knew a party was interested in adopting and the assessment was to begin, such as in our case. The adoption agency submitted a contact/action list that was neither complete nor accurate. We also contend the adoption agency had used fraudulent information in another document as stated on the main webpage.
So if you were to look at the previous contact list which is HERE. Now if the foster wasn't committed to adopting until January 31, 2007, there certainly wasn't any progress made in regards to the foster adopting before the February 7, 2007 hearing as they tried to make the Court of Appeals believe.
Alyssa and Amber's CPS caseworker testified under oath on February 7, 2007. This is a quote from her testimony. "And it's been recent that the foster mother has wanted to adopt." You notice she doesn't say weeks or a month or so ago.
American Heritage Dictionary - recent
Of, belonging to, or occurring at a time immediately before the present.
We motioned the COA for reconsideration which was denied. We now have an appeal pending in the Supreme Court, which can be accessed HERE.