Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence of a statutory ground and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

C. H. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2012-10-17(2)

A court may order termination of the parent-child relationship if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence one of the grounds listed under Section 161.001(1) of the Texas Family Code and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Having reviewed all of the evidence under the standard for legal sufficiency, we conclude that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Father’s parental rights is in the best interest of the child. The evidence is also factually sufficient to support the challenged finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest, which may be supported by evidence of a parent’s violence, missed visits, and inability to provide a stable home.

in the Interest of L.E.M. and S.G.M., Children · filed 2012-10-18(2)

Applying the appropriate standards of review, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding against Father.

Section 161.001 requires a firm belief or conviction, based on the entire record, that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.L.W. and M.M.P., the Children · filed 2012-11-08(2)

Based on our review of the entire record, we hold that the jury could have reasonably formed a firm conviction or belief that termination of the parent-child relationship would be in the best interest of both children. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001; C.H., 89 S.W.3d at 28.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; speculative concerns about future harm did not support that finding here.

in the Interest of M. W. H., C. L. H., S. D. L. H., and T. M. H., Children · filed 2012-11-29(2)

For the foregoing reasons, even with giving due deference to the trial court’s findings, we cannot conclude that the evidence is factually sufficient to support a reasonable trier of fact’s firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother and Father’s parental rights were in M.W.H., C.L.H., S.D.L.H., and T.M.H.’s best interests.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; recurring neglect, physical abuse, and failure to complete services can support that finding.

in the Interest of J.P., M.A., and M v. Children · filed 2012-11-29(2)

Accordingly, the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s family code section 161.001(2) best interest findings.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.A.M. · filed 2012-12-19(2)

Parental rights may be terminated only upon proof by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has committed an act prohibited by section 161.001(1) of the Texas Family Code (“the Code”), and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Under the clear and convincing standard, we hold the evidence is such that the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that a statutory ground exists and termination is in the child’s best interest.

S. C. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2013-01-10(2)

A court may terminate parental rights based on findings by clear and convincing evidence that (1) a parent has committed any of several statutory bases for termination and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.R.W., Child · filed 2013-02-12(2)

Viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment, we conclude that a factfinder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of appellant’s parental rights was in the child’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence of a listed ground for termination and that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of F.H.P., a Child · filed 2013-02-28(2)

To terminate parental rights, it must be shown by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has committed one of the acts listed in Section 161.001(1)(A)–(T) and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... The evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.A.S. Jr., a Child · filed 2013-02-28(2)

Because the evidence is legally insufficient to support the finding that termination is in the child’s best interest, we conclude that the trial court erred in terminating J.M.’s rights pursuant to section 161.001 of the family code.

Section 161.001(2) requires a best-interest finding supported by clear and convincing evidence before parental rights may be terminated.

Threadgill v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2013-03-01(2)

Robert challenges the factual sufficiency of the evidence supporting the trial court’s finding. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(2) (West Supp. 2012). We will affirm the trial court’s decision because we hold that the evidence is sufficient to support termination.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

Hillyer v. State · filed 2013-03-08(2)

Termination of parental rights under Family Code § 161.001 requires proof by clear and convincing evidence that the parent committed one of the acts or omissions listed in § 161.001(1)(A)—(T) and that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the children's best interest, even when a statutory ground for termination is supported.

in Re F.T., Jr., and J.M., Children · filed 2013-03-20(2)

Notwithstanding the sufficiency of the evidence to support termination under section 161.001(1), we must also find clear and convincing evidence that termination of the parent-child relationship was in the children's best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the children’s best interest, even when a statutory ground for termination is supported.

Dobbs v. State · filed 2013-03-20(2)

Notwithstanding the sufficiency of the evidence to support termination under section 161.001(1), we must also find clear and convincing evidence that termination of the parent-child relationship was in the children’s best interest.

A best-interest termination finding is factually sufficient if the entire record could reasonably give the factfinder a firm conviction or belief that termination serves the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.C.K. and C.S.K., Minor Children · filed 2013-02-07

We determine whether, on the entire record, a factfinder could reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that the termination of the parent-child relationship would be in the best interest of the child. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001 (West Supp. 2012); In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17, 28 (Tex. 2002).

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest, in addition to proof of a statutory ground for termination.

in the Interest of V.J.G., and J.A.G., Children · filed 2013-03-26(2)

Termination of parental rights under Family Code § 161.001 requires proof by clear and convincing evidence that the parent committed one of the acts or omissions listed in § 161.001(1)(A) -- (T) and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Viewing the evidence under the applicable standards, we conclude the evidence was both legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of the parental rights of the father and mother was in the best interest of V.J.G. and J.A.G.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

Torres v. State · filed 2013-03-26(2)

Viewing the evidence under the applicable standards, we conclude the evidence was both legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of the parental rights of the father and mother was in the best interest of V.J.G. and J.A.G.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

R. H. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2013-03-28(2)

In light of all of the evidence, the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the best interest of the children. Because the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient, we overrule Issues Two and Three and affirm the trial court’s order.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of G.L.Y., a Child · filed 2013-04-04(2)

To terminate parental rights, it must be shown by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has committed one of the acts listed in Section 161.001(1)(A)–(T) and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Based upon the evidence in the record, we cannot hold that the trial court’s best interest finding is not supported by clear and convincing evidence; the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that it would be in G.L.Y.’s best interest for Appellant’s parental rights to be terminated. The evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; evidence of the child’s bond with the parent is not required to support that finding.

in the Interest of M.C.R. and A.J.R., Children · filed 2013-04-09(2)

Accordingly, the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of appellant’s parental rights was in M.C.R.’s and A.J.R.’s best interests.

Section 161.001 requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest.

P.W. v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2013-04-23(2)

In order to terminate parental rights under section 161.001 of the Family Code, the petitioner must establish that the parent engaged in conduct enumerated in one or more of the subsections of section 161.001(1) and must also show that termination of the parent-child relationship is in the best interest of the child. ... The evidence also supports a finding that termination of P.W.’s parental rights is in the best interests of the children.

Section 161.001 permits termination when a parent commits a listed act or omission and termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of O.N.H., Children · filed 2013-04-24(2)

We hold it was reasonable for the trial court to resolve the conflicts in the evidence in favor of the finding that termination was in the children’s best interest. We therefore conclude the evidence is factually sufficient to support the judgment.

Section 161.001 permits termination when clear and convincing evidence shows it is in the child’s best interest, even if the other parent’s rights remain intact.

C. v. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2013-04-30(2)

That the trial judge may have been willing to give the father a second chance does not require a finding that termination of the mother was not in the children’s best interest. We look only to the conduct, behavior, circumstances, and reasons offered by the mother.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of E.S.D.L.S., A.A.D.L.S., P.H.D.L.S., S.D.L.S., and Y.S., Children · filed 2013-05-30(2)

After weighing the evidence as it relates to the Holley factors, we hold that the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court‘s finding that termination of Mother‘s parental rights to her five children is in the children‘s best interest.

Section 161.001’s best-interest requirement is satisfied when the evidence permits a firm belief that termination serves the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of Y v. a Child · filed 2013-06-13(2)

We conclude and hold that the evidence in this case is such that the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of the parent-child relationship between Mother and Y.V. is in the best interest of Y.V., and that the evidence is legally sufficient to support that finding.

Section 161.001 requires proof of a statutory ground for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest; best interest alone is insufficient.

C. B. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2013-06-19(2)

Under this provision, the petitioner must (1) establish one or more of the statutory acts or omissions enumerated as grounds for termination, and (2) prove that termination is in the best interest of the child. See id. Both elements must be established and termination may not be based solely on the best interest of the child as determined by the trier of fact.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

M. F. P. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2013-06-26(2)

Clear and convincing evidence must support the decision to terminate parental rights, including the best-interest finding. ... We conclude that factually sufficient evidence was presented at trial on which the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of appellant’s parental rights was in S.P.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of K.N., a Child · filed 2013-06-27(2)

In proceedings to terminate the parent-child relationship brought under section 161.001 of the family code, the petitioner must establish one ground listed under subsection (1) of the statute and must also prove that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Considering the evidence cumulatively under the standards of review articulated above, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to clearly and convincingly support the trial court’s judgment because the evidence entitled the trial court to form a firm conviction or belief that termination was in Kathryn’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of K.D.R., Jr. and C.A.M.R., Children · filed 2013-07-18(2)

To terminate parental rights, it must be shown by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has committed one of the acts listed in Section 161.001(1)(A)–(T) and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... The evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.P., Minor Child · filed 2013-07-18(2)

We determine whether, on the entire record, a factfinder could reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that termination of the parent-child relationship would be in the child‘s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.R.B., a Child · filed 2013-08-01(2)

The evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of B.N.H. and J.D.H., Children · filed 2013-08-01(2)

We therefore hold that the evidence supporting the trial court’s best-interest finding is legally and factually sufficient to support the judgment, and we overrule Mother’s sole issue.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest finding can be sustained when the evidence satisfies the Holley factors.

in the Interest of K.K.J. and D.K.S. · filed 2013-08-22(2)

After weighing the evidence as it relates to the Holley factors, we hold that the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court‘s finding that termination of Mother‘s parental rights to K.K.J. and D.K.S. is in the children‘s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination of parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.A. and D.D. · filed 2013-08-28(2)

The trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of J.A.’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest. See id. §§ 161.001(2) (West Supp. 2012), 263.307(b); see also In the Interest of J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256, 266 (Tex. 2002); Holley, 544 S.W.2d at 371-72.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that a parent committed a listed act or omission and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of B.A., J.A., Children · filed 2013-08-28(2)

To terminate parental rights under the Family Code, the State must prove by clear and convincing evidence that (1) the parent has committed an act or omission listed in section 161.001 and (2) termination is in the child’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, even when a parent has voluntarily relinquished parental rights.

in the Interest of A.H. · filed 2013-08-28(2)

Therefore, even if a parent has voluntarily and irrevocably relinquished his or her parental rights under subsection (1), the State must still establish by clear and convincing evidence that termination of parental rights is in the child’s best interest under subsection (2).

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of L. M. A., a Child · filed 2013-09-04(2)

We hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of M.A.’s parental rights is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

T. A. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2013-09-11(2)

Considering all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the finding, we conclude the evidence is legally sufficient because a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that its finding that termination of T.A.’s parental rights was in the best interest of S.D.A. was true.

Section 161.001 requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest in addition to a listed ground for termination.

in the Interest of K.J.L. · filed 2013-09-12(2)

Considering the Holley factors listed above and applying the appropriate standards of review, we hold that legally and factually sufficient evidence supports the trial court’s finding that termination of Father’s parental rights is in K.J.L.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest finding may be upheld when the evidence is factually sufficient.

in the Interest of C.D., a Child · filed 2013-09-17(2)

Accordingly, we conclude the evidence was factually sufficient to support the jury’s finding that termination of appellant’s parental rights was in C.D.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) permits termination when the evidence supports a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest, including evidence that a parent cannot protect the child from physical and emotional danger.

in the Interest of M.R.O. and M.E.O. · filed 2013-09-25(2)

Although the children love their mother and are bonded with her, the trial court could have determined that S.J.O. failed to demonstrate an ability to protect her children, and it was in the children’s best interest that S.J.O.’s parental rights be terminated.

Subsection (2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, evaluated using relevant statutory and Holley factors.

in the Interest of V.L.A. and E.M.C., Children · filed 2013-09-26(2)

Considering the relevant statutory and Holley factors, we hold that, in light of the entire record, and giving due consideration to evidence that the fact-finder reasonably could have found to be clear and convincing, the fact-finder reasonably could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights to the children was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of E.C.R., a Child · filed 2013-10-01(2)

M.R. presented some evidence that weighs against termination; nevertheless, after considering the entire record, we conclude that the evidence is factually sufficient for a reasonable factfinder to have formed a firm belief that termination of M.R.’s parental rights was in E.C.R.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.M., A.U.A., C.A.G., and J.A.M. · filed 2013-10-02(2)

Based on our review of the record, we conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding by clear and convincing evidence that termination of appellant’s parental rights is in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of Z.Z.C. and N.B.C., Children · filed 2013-10-03(2)

Based upon the evidence in the record and the Holley factors, we cannot hold that the trial court’s best interest finding is not supported by clear and convincing evidence; the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that it would be in the best interest of both Z.Z.C. and N.B.C. for the mother’s parental rights to be terminated.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child's best interest, in addition to a statutory ground for termination.

in the Interest of L.G., a Child · filed 2013-10-08(2)

Comparing the record evidence with the relevant factors bearing on their best interests, and especially considering the evidence of the seriously endangering conditions to which the children were subjected, that concerning the risks of recurrence if the mother were to resume their care, and that concerning the degree to which their needs can be met under the Department’s plans for them, we conclude the trial court heard evidence legally and factually sufficient to support its best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest finding must have legally and factually sufficient support in the evidence.

in the Interest of C. S., a Child · filed 2013-10-17(2)

We conclude that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s ruling that termination of A.B.S.’s parental rights was in C.S.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest finding can be upheld after considering the Holley factors.

in the Interest of M.A.M.S. · filed 2013-10-17(2)

After weighing the evidence as it relates to the Holley factors, we hold that the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court‘s finding that termination of Mother‘s and Father‘s parental rights to M.A.M.S. is in the child‘s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J. K. K. B., a Child · filed 2013-10-31(2)

Considering the Holley and relevant statutory factors, we conclude the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination is in J.K.K.B.’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.F.S., a Child · filed 2013-11-13(2)

After considering the evidence, the Holley factors, the undisputed acts or omissions under section 161.001(1) of the Texas Family Code, and the applicable standards of review, we hold there is legally and factually sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s determination that termination of R.S.’s parental rights was in C.F.S.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires a best interest finding supported by clear and convincing evidence; prospective adoption subsidies do not provide an appropriate basis for that finding.

in the Interest of E.D., Children · filed 2013-11-22(2)

We do not believe terminating a parent’s rights to his children so that someone can obtain financial subsidies upon adoption is an appropriate basis on which to base a best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest finding can be upheld when the evidence satisfies the Holley factors.

in the Interest of T.D., Children · filed 2013-12-04(2)

Considering this evidence as applied to the various Holley factors, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that it was in the children’s best interest that Tynika’s parental rights be terminated.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.N.A., a Child · filed 2013-12-04(2)

Before a trial court may terminate the parent-child relationship, it must find by clear and convincing evidence (1) one of the statutory grounds for termination and (2) that termination is in the child’s best interest. ... In light of this evidence, a reasonable trier of fact could form a firm belief or conviction that termination of N.A.A.’s parental rights was in A.N.A.’s best interest. We conclude the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.C.M., D.S.M., and N.J.H., Children · filed 2013-12-04(2)

We hold that under the clear and convincing standard, the evidence is such that the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of T.N.J., D.E.J., J.N.C., and N.J., Children · filed 2013-12-05(2)

We therefore conclude that the evidence presented was legally and factually sufficient for a factfinder to reasonably form a firm belief or conviction that termination of the parent-child relationship was in the best interest of T.N.J. and D.E.J.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest finding must be supported by legally and factually sufficient evidence.

in the Interest of M.P., A.P. and T.P., Children · filed 2014-01-09(2)

The evidence is thus legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s section 161.001(2) best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.U.M.H., a Child · filed 2014-01-30(2)

Considering the Holley and relevant statutory factors, we conclude the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of Mother’s parental rights is in Charles’s best interest.

Section 161.001 permits termination when clear and convincing evidence establishes that termination is in the child’s best interest.

E. H. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2014-01-31(2)

Assessing this record using the applicable standards, we conclude that the record contains legally and factually sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding by clear and convincing evidence that termination of E.H.’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of T.R. and R.R, Children · filed 2014-02-24(2)

Notwithstanding the sufficiency of the evidence to support termination under section 161.001(1), we must also find clear and convincing evidence that termination of the parent-child relationship was in the children’s best interest. See § 161.001(2). ... On the basis of this record, we conclude the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding, and overrule Patrick’s single issue.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of E.A.F., Child · filed 2014-02-25(2)

After considering the relevant factors under the appropriate standards of review, we hold that the evidence presented at trial and summarized above is legally sufficient to reasonably establish a firm belief or conviction that termination of appellant’s parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of B.M.H., H.M.H., and A.M.E., Children · filed 2014-03-06(2)

We hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to clearly and convincingly prove that termination of Mother’s parental rights is in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest finding must have legally and factually sufficient evidentiary support.

in the Interest of D.E., a Child · filed 2014-03-12(2)

In reviewing the record, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of Alfred E.’s parental rights is in D.E.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest requirement is satisfied when the evidence permits a jury to form a firm belief or conviction that termination serves the children’s best interest.

K. L. M. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2014-03-13(2)

We conclude that based on the evidence presented at trial, along with K.L.M.’s tendency to give inconsistent testimony, the jury could have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that the termination of K.L.M’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of S.D.T., a Child · filed 2014-03-14(2)

The evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; a parent’s murder of another child can support that finding.

in the Interest Of: Z.S., a Child · filed 2014-03-17(2)

Having considered the evidence in light of the standard of review and the relevant Holley factors, we conclude that the evidence that Father was convicted of murdering C.S. through physical abuse when C.S. was only three months old is sufficient evidence to allow the jury to reasonably form a firm belief or conviction that termination of Father’s parental rights to Z.S. was in Z.S.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest finding must have legally and factually sufficient evidentiary support.

in the Interest of J. T. K., a Child · filed 2014-03-19(2)

Accordingly, we hold that the evidence of J.T.K.’s best interest is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) permits evidence used to establish a ground for termination to also support a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest.

T. W. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2014-03-19(2)

The same evidence used to establish grounds for termination under Section 161.001(1) may be probative in determining whether termination of parental rights is in the best interest of the child under Section 161.001(2).

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of K.M.L.H., a Child · filed 2014-03-26(2)

Having reviewed the evidence, we conclude it was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding by clear and convincing evidence that termination of J.G.’s parental rights to K.M.L.H. was in K.M.L.H.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest in addition to a predicate ground.

in the Interest of N.G.W. Children · filed 2014-04-02(2)

To terminate parental rights pursuant to section 161.001 of the Family Code, the Department has the burden to prove: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(1); and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Based on the foregoing facts, the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that it was in S.R.M.G.’s best interest that M.G.’s parental rights be terminated.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of L.J.P., a Child · filed 2014-04-03(2)

The trial court also found that termination was in the child’s best interest. See id. § 161.001(2). ... The evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest finding must have legally and factually sufficient evidentiary support.

in the Interest of B.D.M.and S.P.M., Children · filed 2014-04-03(2)

We therefore hold that the evidence supporting the trial court’s best-interest finding is legally and factually sufficient to support the judgment, and we overrule Father’s sole issue.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of Z.C., a Child · filed 2014-04-11(2)

Notwithstanding the sufficiency of the evidence to support termination under section 161.001(1), we must also find clear and convincing evidence that termination of the parent-child relationship was in the child’s best interest. ... From a review of the entire evidentiary record, including the facts from the auto accident which led to Appellant’s convictions for murder and aggravated assault, we find that a reasonable fact finder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Appellant’s parental rights was in the child’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J. T., B. W. and E. T., Children · filed 2014-04-23(2)

Therefore, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of C.T.’s parental rights is in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of P. H. and A. C., Children · filed 2014-05-01(2)

Accordingly, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of the mother’s parental rights was in P.H. and A.C.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of JLA, a Child · filed 2014-05-07(2)

Based on all of the evidence before it, we conclude that the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that terminating R.A.’s parental rights was in J.L.A.’s best interest.

The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the best-interest finding under subsection (2).

in the Interest of D.T v. · filed 2014-05-14(2)

We conclude that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of S.G.’s parental rights to D.T.V. was in D.T.V.’s best interest. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(2).

The evidence supported the required best-interest finding for termination.

in the Interest of M.G., M.G., and K.G., Children · filed 2014-05-22(2)

We therefore conclude that the evidence presented was legally and factually sufficient for a factfinder to reasonably form a firm belief or conviction that termination of appellant’s parental rights was in the best interest of M.G.-1, M.G.-2, and K.G.

Section 161.001 requires proof that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of Y.G.B., a Child · filed 2014-06-04(2)

To terminate parental rights pursuant to section 161.001 of the Family Code, the Department has the burden to prove: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(1); and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Accordingly, the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that it was in Y.G.B.’s best interest that G.B.’s parental rights be terminated.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest; the evidence of prenatal drug exposure, lack of contact, and an inability to provide a stable home supported that finding.

in the Interest of N.S., a Child · filed 2014-06-11(2)

To terminate parental rights pursuant to section 161.001 of the Family Code, the Department has the burden to prove: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(1); and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Based on the foregoing facts, the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that it was in N.S.’s best interest that S.S.’s parental rights be terminated.

The evidence was legally sufficient to support the required best-interest finding.

in the Interest of D.S.O., a Child · filed 2014-06-18(2)

This evidence is legally sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of the parent-child relationship is in D.S.O.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires sufficient evidence to support a firm belief that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of N.H. and M.H., Children · filed 2014-06-25(2)

Therefore, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of K.H.’s parental rights is in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; the court found the evidence factually sufficient to support that finding.

in the Interest of L. W. and Z. H., Children · filed 2014-06-25(2)

Therefore, we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of A.W.’s and E.H.’s parental rights is in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.G., a Child · filed 2014-06-25(2)

After considering the evidence, the relevant Holley factors, and the applicable standards of review, we hold there is legally and factually sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s determination that termination of Father’s parental rights was in the best interests of C.G. Jr. We hold that under the clear and convincing standard, the evidence is such that the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the child’s best interests.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.L., E.G., C.S. and B.S. · filed 2014-06-26(2)

The evidence before the jury, in our opinion, was sufficient to allow the jury to form a firm belief or conviction that the best interest of each child was served by a decision to terminate Mother’s parental rights.

Section 161.001 requires a predicate ground and a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest before parental rights may be terminated.

in the Interest of M.M., a Child · filed 2014-07-02(2)

To terminate parental rights pursuant to section 161.001 of the Family Code, the Department has the burden to prove: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(1); and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Based on the foregoing evidence, the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that it was in M.M.’s best interest that A.H.’s parental rights be terminated.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.E., Jr., Children · filed 2014-07-02(2)

Considering the entire record “in the light most favorable” to the trial court’s findings, we conclude the evidence supports the trial court’s determination that termination of Gerald’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, as well as proof of a statutory ground for termination.

in the Interest of I.V.B. · filed 2014-07-23(2)

Parental rights may be terminated only upon proof of clear and convincing evidence that (1) the parent has committed an act prohibited by section 161.001(1) of the Texas Family Code, and (2) termination is in the best interest of the child. ... We therefore hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.R.P., Children · filed 2014-07-30(2)

Based on our review of the record, we conclude there was clear and convincing evidence that termination of Sondra’s and Marc’s parental rights is in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

W. B. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2014-08-20(2)

We conclude that legally and factually sufficient evidence supports the jury’s finding by clear and convincing evidence that termination of appellant’s parental rights was in the child’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of S.L., Jr. and C.I.L., Children · filed 2014-08-21(2)

To terminate parental rights, it must be shown by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has committed one of the acts listed in Section 161.001(1)(A)–(T) and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... The evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C. R. M., A. L. T., and L. N. T., Children · filed 2014-08-21(2)

In a case to terminate parental rights brought by DFPS under section 161.001, DFPS must establish, by clear and convincing evidence, (1) that the parent committed one or more of the enumerated acts or omissions justifying termination and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Thus, we conclude that the evidence was both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest Of: A.W. · filed 2014-08-21(2)

After considering the Holley factors and the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude the jury could reasonably have found by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in A.W.’s and J.W’s best interest.

The evidence supported the required best-interest finding by clear and convincing evidence.

In re A.W. · filed 2014-08-21(2)

After considering the Holley factors and the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude the jury could reasonably have found by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in A.W.’s and J.W.’s best interest.

The evidence legally and factually supported termination as being in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of B.M., a Child · filed 2014-08-28(2)

Viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the best-interest finding and considering the nonexclusive Holley factors, we hold that the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm conviction or belief that termination of the parent-child relationship between Father and Belinda was in Belinda’s best interest, and we therefore hold the evidence legally sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding. Similarly, reviewing all the evidence with appropriate deference to the factfinder, we hold that the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm conviction or belief that termination of the parent-child relationship between Father and Belinda was in Belinda’s best interest, and we therefore hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of R.S.D. a Child · filed 2014-09-03(2)

After reviewing all the evidence in the record, we conclude the State did not meet its burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that termination of appellant’s parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

Gomez v. Rangel · filed 2014-09-08(2)

Without clear and convincing evidence to support a best interest determination, a trial court errs if it terminates the parent-child relationship. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(1) and (2) (West 2014). ... Accordingly, we conclude the trial court did not err in denying Maria’s petition to terminate the parent-child relationship between Hugo and T.H.A.G and in finding that it is in T.H.A.G.’s best interest to have supervised visitation with his father.

Section 161.001(2) requires termination of parental rights to be in the child’s best interest.

B. B. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2014-09-23(2)

Here, we must only look to the conduct of Father in determining whether termination of Father’s rights was in the children’s best interest. Based on the evidence presented in the record, we find that the trial court did not err in determining termination was in the children’s best interest. The evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the findings.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of L.R.R., Children · filed 2014-09-24(2)

Based on the foregoing evidence, the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that it was in the children’s best interest that Barbara S.’s parental rights be terminated.

Section 161.001 requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest in addition to proof of a predicate ground.

in the Int of AJL, ARL, AAR, and BNG · filed 2014-09-24(2)

To terminate parental rights pursuant to section 161.001 of the Family Code, the Department has the burden to prove: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(1) and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... After reviewing all of the evidence in the record, we conclude the State failed to meet its burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Mother’s parental rights is in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, in addition to proof of a ground for termination.

D. F. and B. W. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2014-09-25(2)

A trial court can order termination of a parent-child relationship only if the trial court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has committed one of several acts or omissions that are grounds for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest. See Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001. ... We conclude that sufficient evidence supports the jury’s finding by clear and convincing evidence that termination of appellants’ parental rights is in J.F.’s best interests.

Section 161.001 requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest even when a statutory ground for termination is unchallenged.

in the Interest of I.J., III, a Child · filed 2014-09-30(2)

Any one of these unchallenged findings was sufficient to support termination as long as termination was shown to be in the child’s best interest. See id. § 161.001.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; the court considers the entire record when reviewing that finding for legal and factual sufficiency.

in the Interest of J.F., M.F., and J.F., Children · filed 2014-10-02(2)

We conclude that this evidence was legally and factually sufficient to allow a fact-finder to reasonably ... form a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

The evidence supported the best-interest finding for termination.

Interest of S.M.E · filed 2014-10-08(2)

Based on this record, under our standard of review, we must conclude that a reasonable factfinder could form a firm belief or conviction that termination of Shawni E.’s parental rights was in S.M.E.’s best interest.

The evidence legally and factually supported the best-interest finding.

in the Interest of D.D., a Child · filed 2014-10-09(2)

We conclude that this evidence and the remaining evidence presented at trial is legally and factually sufficient to clearly and convincingly support the trial court’s judgment because the evidence allowed the trial court to form a firm conviction or belief that termination is in Dustin’s best interest.

The evidence supported the best-interest finding.

in the Interest of M.L. and S.L., Children · filed 2014-10-14(2)

Viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment, we conclude that a fact finder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of the Father’s parental rights is in the Children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of Z.B., a Child · filed 2014-11-07(2)

Similarly, after reviewing the entire record, we hold a factfinder could have reasonably formed a firm conviction or belief that termination was in Zoey’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.J.M., H.A.J.M. and J.M., Children · filed 2014-11-07(2)

Notwithstanding the sufficiency of the evidence to support termination under section 161.001(1), we must also find clear and convincing evidence that termination of the parent-child relationship was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.L.S., C.L.S., J.T.S. and C.S., Children · filed 2014-11-07(2)

Based upon the evidence in the record and the Holley factors, we cannot hold that the trial court’s best interest finding is not supported by clear and convincing evidence; the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that it would be in the best interest of all four children for the mother’s parental rights to be terminated. The evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001 requires proof of at least one statutory ground for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest.

O. L. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2014-11-12

Under this provision, the petitioner must (1) establish one or more of the statutory acts or omissions enumerated as grounds for termination, and (2) prove that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.S. III, a Child · filed 2014-11-12(2)

A trial court may order termination of the parent-child relationship only if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence one or more statutory grounds for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(1), (2) (West 2014); § 161.206(a). ... We must conclude this evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.M.H., a Child · filed 2014-11-26(2)

In conclusion, we hold that under the clear and convincing standard, the evidence is such that the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in J.M.H.’s best interests.

Section 161.001 requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest, supported by clear and convincing evidence.

in the Interest of C.M.T., S.A.P., Children · filed 2014-12-15(2)

On this record, we conclude the trial court reasonably could have formed a firm belief or conviction that it was in C.M.T.’s best interests to terminate J.T.’s parental rights to the child. The contrary evidence was not so significant as to preclude the finding. The evidence thus was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating the parent-child relationship is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of E.D., a Child · filed 2014-12-17(2)

A trial court may order termination of the parent-child relationship only if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence one or more statutory grounds for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(1), (2) (West 2014); § 161.206(a). ... We conclude there is legally and factually sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interests.

in the Interest of K.A.N.C. and N.A.K.C., Children · filed 2014-12-23(2)

Based on this record, under the standards as set out above, we conclude that there is both legally and factually sufficient evidence to allow the trial court to determine that the children’s best interests were served by the termination of Shelia’s parental rights. Therefore, Section 161.001(2) of the Texas Family Code has been met.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of K.B.F. and Z.A.R. · filed 2015-01-07(2)

Accordingly, we hold that under the clear and convincing standard, the evidence is such that the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the best interests of the children and that appointing the Department as managing conservator was appropriate.

The State failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination served the children’s best interests.

in the Interest of B.R., Children · filed 2015-01-07(2)

After reviewing the entire record, we conclude the State did not meet its burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that termination of appellant’s parental rights to her four children is in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of C.M., B.M. and H.M., Children · filed 2015-01-19(2)

Based upon the evidence in the record and the Holley factors, we cannot hold that the trial court’s best interest findings are not supported by clear and convincing evidence; the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that it would be in the best interest of the children for the mother’s and the father’s parental rights to be terminated.

The evidence legally and factually supported the required best-interest finding.

in the Interest of L.D.A. and D.D.A., Children · filed 2015-01-22(2)

In a case to terminate parental rights under section 161.001 of the Family Code, the Department must establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that (1) the parent committed one or more of the enumerated acts or omissions justifying termination and (2) termination is in the best interest of the child. ... We conclude that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of D.G.’s parental rights was in L.D.A. and D.D.A.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of B.G. AKA I.G., a Child · filed 2015-02-02(2)

After considering the relevant factors under the appropriate standards of review, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the jury’s finding that termination of the parent-child relationship is in the Child’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.S. and B.S., Children · filed 2015-02-05(2)

To terminate parental rights, it must be shown by clear and convincing evidence that the parent has committed one of the acts listed in Section 161.001(1)(A)–(T) and that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Based upon the evidence in the record and the Holley factors, we cannot hold that Appellants established as a matter of law, or conclusively established, that it would be in the best interest of A.S. and B.S. to terminate Appellee’s parental rights.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.S., a Child · filed 2015-02-05(2)

Viewing the evidence under the appropriate standards of review, and considering any relevant nonexclusive Holley factors—including the emotional and physical needs of the child now and in the future, the parental abilities of those seeking custody, the plans for the child by these individuals and by the agency seeking custody, and the acts or omissions of the parent which may indicate that the existing parent-child relationship is not a proper one—we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of the parent-child relationship between Father and A.S. is in A.S.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of E.W. AKA E.T.W., a Child · filed 2015-02-10(2)

Therefore, we hold the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of the parent-child relationship is in the Child’s best interest.

Section 161.001 permits a best-interest finding when the evidence supports a firm belief that termination serves the children’s interests.

in the Interest of R.L.C., Jr., R.D.C., K.M.S., and A.M.C., Children · filed 2015-02-12(2)

Considering the Holley factors, and in light of all of the evidence, the fact-finder could have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Smith’s parental rights was in the best interests of Richard, Ralph, Karley, and Alex. The evidence was factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001 requires proof of a statutory ground for termination and proof that termination is in the child's best interest.

in the Interest of S.A.P., C.M.P., and J.L.P., Minor Children · filed 2015-02-13

Under this provision, the petitioner must (1) establish one or more of the statutory acts or omissions enumerated as grounds for termination, and (2) prove that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Section 161.001 requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest, supported by clear and convincing evidence.

in the Interest of F.A.B v. Dccps · filed 2015-02-13(2)

A trial court may terminate the parent-child relationship of the fact finder determines (1) a parent committed one or more of the enumerated statutory acts in section 161.001 of the family code and (2) termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Considering all the Holley and statutory best interest factors and the record as a whole, we conclude clear and convincing evidence supports the jury’s findings that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in F.A.B.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest requirement is satisfied when clear and convincing evidence supports a finding that termination serves the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.T., a Child · filed 2015-02-18(2)

The evidence in this case shows that all of the Holley factors support the trial court’s finding that termination was in the best interest of the child. We find there is sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s finding and overrule Anthony’s point of error.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of K. W. and P. W., Children · filed 2015-02-27(2)

Therefore, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court‘s finding that termination of K.W.‘s parental rights is in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2)’s best-interest finding was supported by legally sufficient evidence in this case.

in the Interest of J. M., a Minor Child · filed 2015-03-05(2)

Viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment, we conclude that a factfinder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of the parent-child relationship was in the child’s best interest. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(2); J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 265–66. Accordingly, we hold that the evidence is legally sufficient to support the jury’s finding that termination of K.M.’s parental rights was in J.M.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires legally and factually sufficient evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of T.R.M. AKA E. T.M., T.J.W AKA T.W., Children · filed 2015-03-10(2)

After considering the relevant factors under the appropriate standards of review, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of the parent-child relationship is in the Children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of S.P., E.P.-M., and C.M. Jr. · filed 2015-03-11(2)

A judgment terminating parental rights must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001 (West 2014). ... Having reviewed the entire record, we hold the evidence is sufficient to reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that termination of Christopher’s parental rights is in E.P.-M.’s and C.M. Jr.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) permits termination when the evidence supports a firm belief that it serves the children’s best interests.

in the Interest of N.R. and A.O., Children · filed 2015-03-12(2)

Based on the entire record, we hold a factfinder could reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that the termination of the parent-child relationship would be in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.E. · filed 2015-03-16(2)

Viewing the evidence under the appropriate standard and considering the various best interest factors, we conclude the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the jury’s finding that termination of Mother’s rights to A.E. was in A.E.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.D.J.Jr. and D.J. · filed 2015-03-23(2)

Having reviewed the evidence, we conclude it was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding by clear and convincing evidence that termination of J.D.J.’s parental rights to J.D.J. Jr. and D.R.J. was in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of M.L.G.J., T.M.J., T.L.W.Jr., M.A.J., T.P.R.J., B.W.D. III, M.R.J., L.C.J., Children · filed 2015-03-24(2)

After considering the relevant factors under the appropriate standards of review, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of the parent-child relationship is in the Children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Int of JNA, JAA, ABD, Children · filed 2015-03-25(2)

Having reviewed the evidence, we conclude it was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding by clear and convincing evidence that termination of M.O.’s parental rights to J.N.A., J.A.A., and A.B.D. was in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of X.R.L., S.J.S., and Z.N.S., Children · filed 2015-04-01(2)

We conclude that the evidence was factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of Evelyn’s parent-child relationships were in the best interests of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.S., a Child · filed 2015-04-02(2)

Based upon the Holley factors and the evidence in the record, we cannot hold that the trial court’s best interest finding is not supported by clear and convincing evidence. The trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that it would be in A.S.’s best interest for Appellant’s parental rights to be terminated.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of T.M.J., a Child · filed 2015-04-09(2)

Based upon the evidence in the record and the Holley factors, we cannot hold that the trial court’s best interest finding is not supported by clear and convincing evidence; the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that it would be in the best interest of the child for the mother’s parental rights to be terminated. The evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the best interest finding.

Section 161.001(2) requires proof that termination is in the child’s best interest; courts assess that finding using the Holley factors.

in the Interest of E.L.M.M. · filed 2015-04-20(2)

To terminate parental rights pursuant to section 161.001 of the Family Code, the Department has the burden to prove: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(1); and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Considering this evidence as applied to the various Holley factors, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that it was in the children’s best interest that ... Mother’s parental rights be terminated.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of R.N.Y., a Child · filed 2015-04-28(2)

Applying the applicable Holley factors to the evidence, we conclude that factually sufficient evidence supports the trial court’s finding that termination of the Mother’s parental rights was in the best interest of the Child.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination of parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of D.B.T. · filed 2015-04-29(2)

On this record, the evidence is insufficient for a factfinder to reasonably form a firm belief or conviction that termination of Ruben’s parental rights is in D.B.T.’s best interest. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we reverse the trial court’s judgment and render judgment denying the Department’s petition to terminate Ruben’s parental rights.

Section 161.001(2) requires sufficient evidence that terminating parental rights is in the children’s best interest.

K. H. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2015-05-01(2)

Although appellant had taken steps toward being an appropriate parent, we conclude that the record contains legally and factually sufficient evidence from which a reasonable trial court could form a firm conviction that termination of her parental rights is in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.R. and T.R. · filed 2015-05-06(2)

We further hold the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to allow the trial court to find termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the best interests of her young children.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of D.T., a Child · filed 2015-05-07(2)

Considering all the evidence in relation to the Holley factors in the light most favorable to the trial court’s best-interest finding, we hold that a reasonable factfinder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Max’s parental rights was in D.T.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of S.P. and H.P., Children · filed 2015-05-07(2)

Based upon the evidence in the record and the Holley factors, we cannot hold that the trial court’s best interest finding is not supported by clear and convincing evidence; the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that it would be in the best interest of both children for the mother’s parental rights to be terminated.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of E.S., a Child · filed 2015-05-07(2)

When viewing this evidence in light of the entire record under the legal sufficiency standard, or when viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the trial court’s finding under the factual sufficiency standard, we conclude that the trial court could have produced a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights to Elijah was in his best interest.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence to terminate parental rights, including evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of N.R v. A.M.A.F. and I.I.F., Children · filed 2015-05-18

A judgment terminating parental rights must be supported by clear and convincing evidence. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001 (West 2014). ... Based on the evidence in the record, we hold the trial court reasonably could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Heather’s rights was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Int of MC, MC, MC, MC, and MC, Children · filed 2015-05-18(2)

Despite this, we hold there is sufficient evidence that would have allowed the trial court to have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination was in the best interests of the children.

Section 161.001(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the children’s best interest; the Department failed to meet that burden in this case.

in the Interest of DM · filed 2015-05-27(2)

Reviewing the record in its entirety, we conclude that the Department failed to meet its burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that termination of appellant’s parental rights is in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(2) permits termination when the evidence supports a firm belief that it serves the children’s best interests.

in the Interest of L.C. and N.M., Children · filed 2015-06-17(2)

Reviewing the evidence under the two standards, we conclude that the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that terminating F.C.’s parental rights to L.C. and N.M. was in the children’s best interests.