Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001

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

in the Interest of C.G., III AKA C.G., a Child · filed 2018-10-02(b)(2)

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

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; drug use, unsafe conditions, missed visits, and failure to complete services can support that finding.

in the Interest of J.D., J.H. Jr., and G.A v. Jr., Children · filed 2018-10-10(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record, we hold the evidence is sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; continued drug use, unmet needs, and a stable adoptive placement can support that finding.

in the Interest of F.M., a Child · filed 2018-10-11(b)(2)

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment for our legal- sufficiency analysis and all of the evidence equally for our factual-sufficiency analysis, we conclude that a reasonable fact finder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the child’s best interest. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(b)(2).

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

v. N. G. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2018-10-17(b)(2)

Therefore, we conclude that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that the termination of V.N.G.’s parental rights is in the children’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of I. J. P., a Child · filed 2018-10-17(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record and considered all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the child’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of M.W., a Child · filed 2018-10-25(b)(2)

Upon considering the record as it relates to the emotional and physical needs of the children now and in the future, the emotional and physical danger to the children now and in the future, the parental abilities of Appellant and the placements, the plans for the children by the Department, the stability of the children’s placements, Appellant’s continued drug use, Appellant’s lack of contact with the children, and Appellant’s inability to care for the children, we hold that the evidence is sufficient to support the findings that termination of Appellant’s parental rights is in the best interest of each of her three children.

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

in the Interest of J. G. and J. G., Children · filed 2018-10-29(b)(2)

After viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the finding and applying the statutory and Holley factors, we conclude that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of R.G.’s parental rights was in the best interest of the children. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(b)(2); In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 266.

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

in the Interest of A. F. S. and E. L. S., Children · filed 2018-10-30(b)(2)

Before a trial court may terminate parental rights, the Department must prove by clear and convincing evidence that both a predicate statutory ground under section 161.001(b)(1) exists and that termination of parental rights is in the children’s best interests. ... Considering all the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s finding, we conclude that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of the mother’s parental rights would be in the children’s best interests.

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

M. D. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2018-10-31(b)(2)

Thus, we conclude that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding.

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

in the Interest of X.E.R., a Child · filed 2018-10-31(b)(2)

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s finding under subsection 161.001(2), we conclude the trial court reasonably could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of the parent-child relationship is in X.E.R.’s best interest.

A parent’s substantial compliance with a service plan does not preclude a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.J.O., a Child · filed 2018-10-31(b)(2)

However, even if Jeremy had substantially complied with his service plan, it would not preclude a finding that termination was in the child’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of J.C., I.C., and A.C. · filed 2018-11-07(b)(2)

Considering all the evidence under the two evidentiary standards, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that terminating Mom’s parental rights to her children was in the children’s best interests. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(b)(2); In re E.N.C., 384 S.W.3d 796, 807 (Tex. 2012).

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

in the Interest of L.M.N. AKA L.N., D.Y.L.N., J,J,L.N. AKA J.L.L. v. Department of Family and Protective Services and Ja · filed 2018-11-08(b)(2)

We further hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of father’s parental rights is in the best interest of D.Y.L.N. and J.J.L.N.

A parent’s voluntary statement in a binding mediated settlement agreement that termination is in the child’s best interest can satisfy the clear-and-convincing-evidence requirement.

in the Interest of A.C., J.Y., J.Y. Jr., L.B., and E.B., Children · filed 2018-10-26(b)(2)

We hold that a parent’s voluntary and affirmative statements that termination of parental rights is in the child’s best interest in a mediated settlement agreement binding on the parties under section 153.0071(d) of the Family Code can satisfy, and does here, the requirement that a best-interest finding be supported by clear and convincing evidence.

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

in the Interest L.J.R. · filed 2018-11-14(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record and considered all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the child’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of A.J.T., Children · filed 2018-11-15(b)(2)

To terminate parental rights, a trial court must find both a statutory violation and that termination is in the best interest of the child. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(b)(1)–(2). ... Based on the evidence at trial, we conclude a reasonable fact-finder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the best interest of the children.

A best-interest finding under Section 161.001(b)(2) is supported when the Holley factors provide legally and factually sufficient evidence for termination.

in the Interest of L.M., Jr., a Child · filed 2018-11-19(b)(2)

In order to terminate parental rights, the trial court must find clear and convincing evidence that the parent has engaged in at least one statutory ground for termination and that termination is in the child’s best interest. TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001 (West Supp. 2018); In re E.N.C., 384 S.W.3d 796, 798 (Tex. 2012). ... After weighing the Holley factors, we conclude that the trial court’s best-interest finding was supported by legally and factually sufficient evidence.

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

E. B. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2018-11-20(b)(2)

Accordingly, we conclude that the evidence is legally sufficient to support the district court’s finding by clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest; continued drug use and failure to protect the child can support that finding.

in the Interest of J.B. · filed 2018-11-21(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record and considered all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Father’s parental rights was in the child’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of Z.L.A. and K.L.A. · filed 2018-11-28(b)(2)

In looking at all this evidence in the record in the light most favorable to the trial court’s finding, we hold that the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Appellant Father’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; completing a service plan does not by itself defeat that finding.

in the Interest of J.A.M., S.N.M., M.A.H., Children · filed 2018-11-29(b)(2)

Viewing all the evidence equally for our factual-sufficiency analysis, we conclude that a reasonable fact finder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s rights was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest, supported by clear and convincing evidence.

in the Interest of J.M. and J.M., Children · filed 2018-12-06(b)(2)

For these reasons, we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to show that termination of Father’s parental rights is in the children’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of R.S.G. Children · filed 2018-12-12(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record and considered all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’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 E.X.G., Minor Child · filed 2018-12-12(b)(2)

To terminate parental rights pursuant to section 161.001 of the Texas Family Code, the Department has the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(b)(1); and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Having reviewed the record, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of S.G.’s parental rights was in E.X.G.’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of S.P., A.P., A.P., and J.P., Children · filed 2018-12-13(b)(2)

We therefore hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Father’s parental rights is in the children’s best interest, and we overrule Father’s sole issue.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; continued drug use, inadequate parenting, and failure to complete services can support that finding.

in the Interest of A.J.B. and A.J.B., Children · filed 2018-12-19(b)(2)

Accordingly, we thus hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to establish that terminating D.A.’s parental rights is in the twins’ best interest.

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

in the Interest of E.M.G., a Child · filed 2018-12-20(b)(2)

Considering the entire record, we conclude the evidence the trial court could not reasonably have credited in favor of termination is not so significant as to prevent the court from reasonably forming a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s rights was in Evelyn’s best interest. Accordingly, the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding.

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

in the Interest of N.R.T, C.C.T., A.T., Children · filed 2019-01-02(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record and considered all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of K.M.R.L., a Child · filed 2019-01-02(b)(2)

We find that the evidence was factually sufficient for the jury to have found that termination was in the best interest of K.M.R.L.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires a best-interest finding to terminate parental rights; continued drug use and failure to complete services can support that finding.

in the Interest of Z.G. and C.C.-G., Children · filed 2019-01-04(b)(2)

For these reasons, and after a detailed review of the entire record, we find the evidence both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of K.G.’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 M.R., a Child · filed 2019-01-04(b)(2)

Hence, the evidence supporting the court’s finding that termination of the father’s parental rights was in the best interest of M.R. was legally and factually sufficient.

Section 161.001(b)(2)’s best-interest requirement may be satisfied even when the child has an approved placement with a relative.

in the Interest of J.D., a Child · filed 2019-01-10(b)(2)

Father cites no direct authority for his public-policy argument that placing a child with a family member should insulate a parent from losing his parental rights. ... We therefore reject Father’s argument. ... we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding, and we overrule Father’s only issue.

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

in the Interest of A.S., a Child · filed 2019-01-17(b)(2)

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment, we hold that a factfinder could reasonably form a firm belief or conviction that terminating Mother’s parental rights was in Andrew’s, Bruce’s, and Charles’s best interest, and that the evidence is therefore legally sufficient to support the best-interest findings.

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

in Re L.S.D · filed 2019-01-23(b)(2)

Considering all the evidence under the two evidentiary standards, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that terminating Mom’s parental rights to L.S.D. was in the child’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of S.L.S., a Child · filed 2019-01-28(b)(2)

We hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; parental drug use, failure to complete services, unstable housing, and the children’s stable placements can support that finding.

in Re R.P., III, N.J.P., L.M.P., T.J.P., and D.D.P. · filed 2019-01-30(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of R.P., Jr.’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of L.N.C & K.N.M., Children · filed 2019-01-31(b)(2)

Termination must be in the child’s best interest. Tex. Fam. Code § 161.001(b)(2). ... Applying the applicable Holley factors to the evidence, we conclude that legally sufficient evidence supports the trial court’s finding that termination of Father’s rights is in Laura’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of D.S., a Child · filed 2019-02-06(b)(2)

Considering all the evidence under the two evidentiary standards, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that terminating Mom’s parental rights to D.S. is in the child’s best interest. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(b)(2); In re E.N.C., 384 S.W.3d 796, 807 (Tex. 2012).

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

in the Interest of S.A.M. · filed 2019-02-13(b)(2)

Analyzing the evidence under the applicable law and appropriate standards of review, we hold the trial court could have reasonably determined termination of Mother’s and Father’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires a finding that termination is in each child’s best interest, assessed in light of that child’s circumstances.

in the Interest of T. R. and P. H. v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2019-02-14(b)(2)

Considering the entire record, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in Troy’s and Paul’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of R.P., a Child · filed 2019-02-14(b)(2)

From the foregoing, we conclude that the entirety of the record before us contains evidence both legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of T.L.’s parental rights was in the best interests of the children.

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

in the Interest of E.P.-M., a Child · filed 2019-02-14(b)(2)

Before terminating parental rights, a trial court must find by clear and convincing evidence both that the parent has committed at least one of several statutorily-enumerated acts or omissions and that termination is in the child’s best interest. See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001(b). ... In sum, after considering the Holley factors under the applicable sufficiency standards of review, we conclude that the clear and convincing evidence before the trial court was legally and factually sufficient to support its conclusion that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in Evan’s best interest.

A possible relative placement does not bar termination; placement is a factor in deciding the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of R.A., R.G., and J.G., Children · filed 2019-02-07(b)(2)

Even if the children had been placed with relatives, termination was still possible.

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

in the Interest of R.C.P., R.I.P., M.E.P., and R.C.P. · filed 2019-02-20(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of D.C.’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001 permits a best-interest finding even when evidence is absent on some relevant factors; the evidence must support a firm conviction that termination is in the children’s best interest.

in the Interest of J.T. and A.T., Children · filed 2019-02-20(b)(2)

There is no requirement that all of these factors must be proved as a condition precedent to parental termination, and the absence of evidence about some factors does not preclude a factfinder from reasonably forming a strong conviction that termination is in the children's best interest.

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

in the Interest of K.J.C., a Child · filed 2019-02-26(b)(2)

We find the evidence both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of the parents’ parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of E.S. and B.S., Children · filed 2019-02-28(b)(2)

Overall, having considered the trial record in the light most favorable to the judgment, we conclude that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction, based on clear and convincing evidence, that termination of appellants’ parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of R.O.D.S. AKA Jane Doe · filed 2019-03-05(b)(2)

Parental rights can be terminated upon proof by clear and convincing evidence that (1) the parent has committed an act prohibited by section 161.001(b)(1); and (2) termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Applying the Holley factors to the evidence, we conclude that factually sufficient evidence supports the trial court’s finding that termination of Mother’s rights is in Rachel’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination serves the child’s best interest, even when a predicate ground for termination is established.

in the Interest of J. G. S. a Child v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2019-03-14(b)(2)

We conclude there is legally sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s ruling on best interest but factually insufficient evidence that termination of Cooper’s parental rights is in Joanne’s best interest. We sustain Cooper’s tenth issue and therefore reverse the judgment terminating Cooper’s parental rights.

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

in the Interest of K.K., a Child · filed 2019-03-15(b)(2)

A court may terminate a parent-child relationship if it finds by clear and convincing ... evidence (1) one or more statutory grounds for termination and (2) that termination is in the child’s best interest. FAM. § 161.001(b)(1)–(2). ... After considering the evidence and the relevant factors under the appropriate standards of review, we hold that the evidence presented at trial and summarized above is legally and factually sufficient to reasonably establish a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights is in K.K.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2)’s best-interest requirement may be supported by evidence of past endangerment and drug use despite a parent’s recent improvements.

in the Interest of H.R.M., a Child · filed 2019-03-22(b)(2)

Hence, the evidence supporting the court’s finding that termination of the mother’s parental rights was in H.R.M.’s best interest was legally and factually sufficient.

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

in the Interest of K.M.J., a Child · filed 2019-04-03(b)(2)

We therefore hold that the Department failed to meet its heightened burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Father’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; a child’s wish to reunite and a parent’s improvement can weigh against that finding.

in the Interest of D. R. P. and H. I. P., Children · filed 2019-04-04(2)

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

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires sufficient evidence that termination is in the children’s best interests; evidence supporting statutory grounds for termination may inform that finding.

in the Interest of E.X.H. and S.M.H., Children · filed 2019-02-22(b)(2)

From the foregoing, we conclude that the entirety of the record before us contains evidence both legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of M.H.’s parental rights was in the best interests of the children.

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

in the Interest of N.T., a Child · filed 2019-04-10(b)(2)

We hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding.

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

in the Interest of C.D.M. and A.P., Children · filed 2019-04-24(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record and considered all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of A.S.A. and A.S.A., Minor Children · filed 2019-04-24(b)(2)

Considering all the evidence under the two evidentiary standards, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that terminating Dad’s parental rights to his children was in the children’s best interests.

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

in the Interest of P.C., a Child · filed 2019-04-30(b)(2)

Thus, we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, assessed under the non-exhaustive Holley factors.

in the Interest of K.N.J. and K.J. · filed 2019-05-08(b)(2)

To terminate parental rights, the Department has the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(b)(1), and (2) termination is in the best interests of the child. ... After considering all of the evidence in the record in light of the Holley factors, we conclude there is sufficient evidence in the record supporting the trial court’s best interest finding.

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

in the Interest of K.M., a Child · filed 2019-05-21(b)(2)

Based on the record before us, we find clear and convincing evidence to support the trial court’s finding that the child’s best interests would be served by terminating Christy’s parental rights.

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

in the Interest of A.M.S., Children · filed 2019-05-22(b)(2)

Clear and convincing evidence must support a trial court’s findings under section 161.001(b)(2) of the Texas Family Code (“the Code”). ... We hold the foregoing evidence, when considered in light of the standard of review and relevant law, is sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of Father’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; a parent’s unmanaged mental illness and its effect on the safety and stability of the home may support that finding.

in the Interest of T.W. and X.W., Children · filed 2019-05-22(b)(2)

Accordingly, the evidence is factually sufficient to establish that terminating Randy’s parental rights is in the best interest of T.W. and X.W.

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

in the Interest of J.T.W.P., a Child v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2019-05-23(b)(2)

Considering the evidence in a light favorable to the trial court’s judgment, we conclude that a reasonable factfinder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of the mother’s parental rights was in Jacob’s best interest. We further conclude that, in light of the entire record, factually sufficient evidence supports the court’s firm conviction and belief that termination of the mother’s parental rights was in Jacob’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of M.K. and V.G., Children · filed 2019-05-29(b)(2)

But no reasonable factfinder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Father’s parental rights at this time was in M.K.’s best interest. In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 266. The evidence is legally insufficient to support the trial court’s finding to the contrary.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the children's best interest.

in the Interest of B.B., B.B., and S.B., Children · filed 2019-05-29(b)(2)

When we consider the entire record in light of the Holley factors and give appropriate deference to the trial court as the factfinder, we find that the evidence was factually sufficient for the trial court to have found that termination was in the best interest of the children.

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

in the Interest of D.B.B. Children · filed 2019-06-05(b)(2)

Considering all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude that the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that terminating Mom’s and Dad’s parental rights to the children was in each child’s best interest. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(b)(2); In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d 256, 261 (Tex. 2002).

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; a parent’s continuing drug use and inability to provide a stable home can support that finding.

in the Interest of T.R.S. · filed 2019-06-13(b)(2)

We conclude the record contains legally and factually sufficient evidence supporting the trial court’s best-interest finding.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; evidence of domestic violence, unmet needs, and an unstable home can support that finding.

in the Interest of D.M.H., Jr., a Child · filed 2019-06-19(b)(2)

To terminate parental rights pursuant to section 161.001 of the Texas Family Code, the Department has the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(b)(1); and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the child. ... Having reviewed the record, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that terminating S.C.’s parental rights was in D.M.H., Jr.’s best interest.

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

M. v. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2019-06-19(b)(2)

Thus, the evidence in this record is factually sufficient to support the court’s best interest finding under section 161.001(b)(2) of the Texas Family Code.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; relevant evidence includes the child’s medical needs, a parent’s drug use, and the stability of a prospective adoptive home.

in the Interest D.G. and D.G., Children v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2019-06-20(b)(2)

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

A best-interest finding under § 161.001(b)(2) can be supported by a parent’s repeated cocaine use, continued exposure to domestic violence, and the children’s stable foster placement, despite the parent’s stable job and home.

in the Interest of E. C.A. and A. A. G., Children v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2019-06-27(b)(2)

Thus, we conclude that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, assessed on the full record when factual sufficiency is challenged.

in the Interest of D. D. M., J. C. M. and J. D. M., Jr. Children v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2019-07-09(b)(2)

We therefore sustain J.M.’s issue that the evidence is factually insufficient to support a finding that termination is in his children’s best interests.

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

in the Interest of R.M v. Children · filed 2019-07-10(b)(2)

To terminate parental rights, the Department must prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(b)(1), and (2) termination is in the child’s ... best interest. ... After considering all of the evidence in the record in light of the Holley factors, we conclude legally and factually sufficient evidence supports the trial court’s best interest finding.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; persistent instability in a parent’s housing, employment, and health can support that finding.

in the Interest of J.C., a Child · filed 2019-07-16(b)(2)

Although she avoided use of illegal drugs, throughout the period she struggled with issues of employment and housing and mental and physical health. By final hearing her housing remained unstable. The record demonstrates a lack of stability in other areas of the mother’s life as well. On this record we find the evidence supporting the trial court’s best-interest finding, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, legally sufficient. Likewise, when assessed in a neutral light we find the trial court’s best-interest finding factually sufficient.

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

in the Interest of A. N., Children · filed 2019-07-24(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record and considered all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Father’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of J.G.M., D.M., L.M. & L.M., Children · filed 2019-07-24(b)(2)

After viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the finding and applying the statutory and Holley factors, we conclude that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of L.M.’s parental rights was in the best interest of the children. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(b)(2); In re J.F.C., 96 S.W.3d at 266.

Section 161.001 requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; the finding is factually sufficient when the whole record permits a reasonable fact-finder to form a firm belief or conviction that termination serves that interest.

in the Interest of A.M. and A.M., Children · filed 2019-07-25(b)(2)

Considering the entire record, we find that a fact-finder could reasonably form a firm belief or conviction that termination of Kim’s parental rights was in the best interests of Adam and Amy.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; drug use, domestic violence, unstable housing, and an incomplete service plan can support that finding.

in the Interest of J.M.L.T., a Child · filed 2019-07-31(b)(2)

Therefore, after considering all of the evidence in the record, we conclude the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding with respect to both Janece and Daniel.

Section 161.001(b) requires the Department to prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of G.M, a Child · filed 2019-07-31(b)

The Department bore the burden of proof at trial. TEX. FAM. CODE § 161.001(b). As is relevant to F.M.’s claims on appeal, the Department’s burden was to prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination of F.M.’s parental rights was in G.M.’s best interests.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; abuse, incomplete services, drug use, and an unstable home can support that finding.

in the Interest of G.M, a Child · filed 2019-07-31(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that terminating F.M.’s parental rights was in G.M.’s best interest.

Termination requires clear and convincing evidence that it is in the child’s best interest; the court reviews the whole record to assess whether a factfinder could reasonably reach that conclusion.

in the Interest of S.C., a Child · filed 2019-06-13(b)(2)

Because we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the termination of Father’s parental rights; ... we affirm the trial court’s judgment as to Father.

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

in the Interest of A.M.J., a Child · filed 2019-08-01(b)(2)

Therefore, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of the father’s parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of M.F and.L.B., Children · filed 2019-08-02(b)(2)

After reviewing all the evidence under the appropriate standard of review, we conclude the evidence is legally and factually sufficient 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(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of R.M., a Child · filed 2019-08-07(b)(2)

Because we conclude the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding, we reverse the portion of the trial court’s order terminating Tiffany’s parental rights and remand this cause to the trial court for a new trial.

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

in the Interest of J.O., a Child · filed 2019-08-15(b)(2)

Therefore, we hold that the evidence is sufficient to support the finding that termination of Appellant’s parental rights is in J.O.’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of H.B.C., S.C.C., and A.S.C., Children · filed 2019-08-21(b)(2)

Considering all the evidence under the two evidentiary standards, we conclude the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s findings by clear and convincing evidence, and the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that terminating Mom’s parental rights is in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; scant evidence cannot support that finding.

in the Interest of J.C., Jr., a Child · filed 2019-08-21(b)(2)

Therefore, viewing the above evidence relating to the statutory and Holley factors in the light most favorable to the trial court’s best interest finding, we conclude that a reasonable fact finder could not have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of J.C.’s and M.D.’s parental rights is in the child’s best interest, and therefore, the evidence of best interest under Section 161.001(b)(2) is legally insufficient.

Evidence supporting a ground for termination under subsection (b)(1) may also support a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A. L. P. a Child · filed 2019-08-22(b)(1)

Moreover, we note that evidence supporting termination under one of the grounds listed in section 161.001(b)(1) can also be considered in support of a finding that termination is in the best interest of the child.

Evidence of drug use, domestic violence, unstable housing, and a stable prospective adoptive home can support a finding that termination is in a child’s best interest.

N. P. and J. P. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2019-08-22(b)(2)

Viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s finding, we conclude that a reasonable factfinder could form a firm belief or conviction that termination of the Mother’s parental rights is in the best interest of the children. Thus, legally sufficient evidence supports the finding.

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

in the Interest of E.B. and M.B., Children · filed 2019-08-22(b)(2)

We hold that the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best interest finding.

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

in the Interest of J.J.C.B.R., J.E.R., and J.J.D.R., Children · filed 2019-09-18(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination is in the children’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of N.M., a Child · filed 2019-09-19(b)(2)

We conclude that the evidence reflected in the record allowed the trial court to form a firm conviction or belief that the termination of Father’s parental rights was in Nathan’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires a firm conviction or belief that terminating parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of A.E., a Child · filed 2019-10-01(b)(2)

All the evidence, especially Mother’s untreated drug addiction and mental illness (both of which endangered Adam), her lack of attachment to him, and her unstable housing and employment, allowed the trial court to reasonably form a firm conviction or belief that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in Adam’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2)’s best-interest requirement is an element of parental termination that may be presumed when separate findings of fact omit it, statutory grounds are expressly found, and the evidence supports it.

in the Interest of K.A., a Child · filed 2019-09-12(b)(2)

Because a best-interest finding is a prescribed element for parental termination, the best-interest element is presumed in each of the express findings made in the trial court’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.

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

in the Interest of A.B., a Child · filed 2019-10-15(b)(2)

We conclude that the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to establish a firm conviction in the mind of the trial court that termination of father’s parental rights is in the best interest of A.B.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; placement with a relative or the retention of another parent’s rights does not decide that question.

in the Interest of N.A.L. and N.A.R., Children · filed 2019-10-18(b)(2)

The trial court’s decisions regarding managing conservatorship—to appoint I.M.S.’s paternal grandmother to be the sole managing conservator of I.M.S. and to appoint N.A.L.’s and N.A.R.’s father to be their sole managing conservator—are not dispositive with respect to the question of whether it was in the children’s best interest to terminate Appellant’s parental rights. The trial court’s failure to terminate the parental rights of I.M.S.’s father is also not dispositive of the issue before us.

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

in the Interest of Z.K.W., Children · filed 2019-10-23(b)(2)

To terminate parental rights, the Department must prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(b)(1) and (2) termination is in the child’s best interest. ... We hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding.

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

in the Interest of E.J.C, Jr., S.R.C., E.D.C., Children · filed 2019-10-23(b)(2)

Considering all the evidence under the two evidentiary standards, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that terminating Dad’s parental rights to his children was in the children’s best interests.

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

D. L.-B. v. T. D. and J. D. · filed 2019-10-30(b)(2)

Viewing the above evidence in the light most favorable to the district court’s finding, we conclude that a reasonable factfinder could form “a firm belief or conviction” that termination of the 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 the Interest of T.N.R., a Child · filed 2019-10-30(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that terminating E.R.’s parental rights was in T.N.R.’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of A.L.R., a Child · filed 2019-11-06(b)(2)

On this record, we conclude that no reasonable factfinder could form a firm belief or conviction that termination of J.R.’s parental rights is in A.L.R.’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.M.P.M. and N.J.M., Jr., Children · filed 2019-11-13(b)(2)

Based on this evidence, the trial court could have reasonably determined the Department produced clear and convincing evidence that termination of S.C.’s parental rights to both S.M.P.M. and N.J.M., Jr. was in the children’s best interests.

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

in the Interest of N. R. G., a Child · filed 2019-11-13(b)(2)

Considering the entire record, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s ... finding that termination of Jennifer W.’s parental rights is in the child’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of K.D. and V.P.D., Children · filed 2019-11-14(b)(2)

We hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s findings that termination of Appellant’s parental rights is in K.D.’s and V.P.D.’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of A.M.J., A.E.G., A.D.W., and A.A.G. · filed 2019-11-20(b)(2)

Although the trial record here is limited, after considering all of the trial evidence in light of the statutory and Holley factors, we conclude there is sufficient evidence in the record supporting the trial court’s best interest finding.

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

in the Interest of K.H., Q.H., Q.H., and S.R., Children · filed 2019-11-22(b)(2)

Similarly, reviewing all of the evidence with appropriate deference to the factfinder, we hold that the jury had sufficient evidence before it that was relevant to the Holley factors from which it could have reasonably formed a firm conviction or belief that termination of the parent-child relationship between Mother and the children was in the children’s best interest, and we therefore hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the jury’s best-interest findings.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; a parent’s drug use, failure to complete services, and inability to provide a stable home can support that finding.

in the Interest of T.J. Children · filed 2019-11-27(b)(2)

Giving due consideration to evidence that the trial court could reasonably have found to be clear and convincing, and based on our review of the entire record, we hold that the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of C.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 addition to proof of a statutory ground.

in the Interest of C.G. and R.G., Children · filed 2019-11-27(b)(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(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of O.C., R.C., K.C., and H.C., Children · filed 2019-12-05(b)(2)

Therefore, we hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of Appellant’s parental rights is in the best interest of O.C., R.C., K.C., and H.C. See id.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; missed drug tests and failure to complete services may support that finding.

in the Interest of A.M.L., a Child · filed 2019-12-11(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record and considered all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Father’s parental rights was in the child’s best interest.

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

in Re Z.K.T.W. and Z.K.R. · filed 2019-12-11(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record and considered all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest, supported by evidence that allows a firm conviction or belief.

in the Interest of R.H. and R.C., Children · filed 2019-12-12(b)(2)

Viewing all the evidence with the appropriate deference to the fact-finder, we hold that the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm conviction or belief that termination of W.C.’s parental rights was in Roman’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(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest.

in the Interest of S.N.S., a Child · filed 2019-12-12(b)(2)

Therefore, we hold that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the finding that termination of Appellant’s parental rights is in the best interest of S.N.S.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest, and a parent’s violent conduct and incarceration may support that finding.

in Re THJ, Children · filed 2020-01-02(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that terminating P.J.’s parental rights was in children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; persistent drug use, unstable housing, and failure to complete services can support that finding.

in the Interest of J.G.C., Jr., C.A.C., H.C., Z.C., and J.A.C., Children · filed 2020-01-22(b)(2)

After considering all of the trial evidence in light of the statutory and Holley factors, we conclude there is sufficient evidence in the record supporting the trial court’s best interest finding.

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

in the Interest of A.N., A.E.N., and E.O.R. · filed 2020-01-22(b)(2)

Therefore, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(b)(2).

Section 161.001(b)(2)’s best-interest requirement can be satisfied by evidence of a child’s stable adoptive placement and an incarcerated parent’s limited relationship with the child and uncertain ability to provide future care.

in the Interest of K.C., a Child · filed 2020-01-23(b)(2)

We hold that the evidence is both legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding; therefore, we overrule Father’s two issues.

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

in the Interest of H.B.C., a Child · filed 2020-01-23(b)(2)

We conclude that the evidence before the trial court was legally and factually sufficient, such that a reasonable factfinder could have formed a firm belief or conviction that it was in H.B.C.’s best interest to terminate Mother’s parental rights.

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

in the Interest of Z. M. a Child · filed 2020-02-05

The record establishes by clear and convincing evidence at least one of the grounds for termination and that termination of A.M.’s parental rights is in Z.M.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; neglect and failure to address mental health needs can support that finding.

in the Interest of J.J.H., R.J.H., J.D.H., and A.J.H., Children · filed 2020-02-12(b)(2)

Therefore, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(b)(2).

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

S. M. S. and L. A. E. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2020-02-19(b)(2)

Reviewing the record under the appropriate standards of review and considering the relevant factors, we conclude that legally and factually sufficient evidence supports the district court’s conclusion that termination was 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 the Interest of A.B.S., a Child · filed 2020-02-19(b)(2)

Having reviewed the record, we hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that terminating R.O.’s parental rights was in A.B.S.’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of M.M.H., a Child · filed 2020-02-19(b)(2)

We find that the evidence is legally sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination is in the best interest of the child2.

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

in the Interest of M.T. and J.T., Children · filed 2020-02-20(b)(2)

The Department was required to prove by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Father’s parental rights was in the children’s best interest. ... Therefore, we hold that the evidence is sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination is in the children’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b) requires clear and convincing proof of both a statutory ground and the child’s best interest; an unchallenged finding against best interest independently supports denial of termination.

in the Interest of Q.M., a Child · filed 2020-02-20(b)

Because the Department has not challenged an independent basis—the implied finding on best interest—that supports the trial court’s judgment, we must overrule the Department’s challenge concerning the statutory ground for termination.

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

in the Interest of M.A.J.Jr., H.A.J., and B.D.J., Children v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2020-03-05(b)(2)

In order to terminate the parent-child relationship, DFPS must establish, by clear and convincing evidence, that termination of parental rights is in the best interest of the children.

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

in the Interest of J.L v. · filed 2020-03-11(b)(2)

The Department failed to meet its burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that terminating Mother’s rights would be in Jack’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of D.R.C., a Child · filed 2020-03-25(b)(2)

Based upon our review of the entire record, we conclude that the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm conviction or belief that termination of the mother’s parental rights was in D.R.C.’s best interest. Therefore, we hold that the evidence is sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination is in his best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires a best-interest finding; repeated violations of a no-contact order and an inability to care for the child for several months can support that finding.

in the Interest of H.C., a Child · filed 2020-04-01(b)(2)

Because we find the evidence legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding, we overrule Kara’s points of error.

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

in the Interest of J v. a Child · filed 2020-04-01(b)(2)

Based on our exacting review of the entire record and giving due deference to the fact-finder’s findings, we likewise conclude that the evidence is factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding.

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

in the Interest of J.L.K, J.H.K., T.C.C. and J.B.K v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2020-04-02(b)(2)

Viewing all the evidence, including disputed or conflicting evidence, we conclude that the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Arial’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; evidence supporting a predicate ground may also support that finding.

in the Interest of A. L., T. L. S. and T. S. v. Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2020-04-02(b)(2)

The “best interest” finding is a separate inquiry from the finding of a predicate act, but evidence that supports a predicate-act finding may also be probative of the best interest of the child. See TEX. FAM. CODE § 161.001(b)(2); A.R.R., 2018 WL 3233334, at *4. ... We conclude that that the disputed evidence regarding the mother’s drug use—i.e., the mother’s denial of drug use—was not so significant that it would have prevented the trial court from reasonably forming a firm belief or conviction that termination of the mother’s parental rights is in the best interest of the children.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; a parent’s violence, an unstable home, and the children’s trauma may support that finding.

in the Interest of A.O.G. and A.J.G., Children · filed 2020-02-26(b)(2)

We therefore overrule J.P.’s arguments to the contrary and hold that legally and factually sufficient evidence supports the trial court’s finding, by clear and convincing evidence, that termination of J.P.’s parental rights was in the best interests of A.O.G. and A.J.G.

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

in Re K.J.C., Jr. and J.S.M. · filed 2020-04-08(b)(2)

To terminate parental rights, the Department must prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) one of the predicate grounds for termination in subsection 161.001(b)(1); and (2) termination is in the child’s best interest. ... We hold the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that termination of Karl’s parental rights is in Karl, Jr.’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of J.M. and L.M., Children · filed 2020-04-09(b)(2)

Considering these factors, and considering all 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 interests of J.M. and L.M. We, therefore, conclude that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the court’s best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; evidence of ongoing substance abuse, domestic violence, and a stable prospective adoptive placement supported that finding.

in the Interest of L.D.L., a Child · filed 2020-04-15(b)(2)

To terminate parental rights, the Department has the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(b)(1), and (2) termination is in the best interest of the child. ... After considering all of the trial evidence in light of the statutory and Holley factors, we conclude there is sufficient evidence in the record supporting the trial court’s best interest finding.

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

in the Interest of K.E.R., K.R.R., Q.A.R., and M.C., Children · filed 2020-04-15(b)(2)

Therefore, after considering all of the trial evidence in light of the statutory and Holley factors, we conclude there is sufficient evidence in the record supporting the trial court’s best interest finding as it pertains to Robert.

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

in the Interest of M. W., a Child · filed 2020-04-16(b)

Before parental rights may be involuntarily terminated, the trier of fact must find two elements by clear and convincing evidence: (1) that the parent committed one of the statutory grounds for termination found in § 161.001(b)(1) of the family code; and (2) that termination is in the child’s best interest. ... Considering all the evidence in the light most favorable to the judgment, we conclude that a reasonable trier of fact could have formed a firm belief or conviction, based on clear and convincing evidence, that terminating Mother’s parental rights was in M.W.’s best interests.

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

in the Interest of S.U. and A.H., Children · filed 2020-04-23(b)(2)

We therefore hold that the evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding.

Section 161.001(b)(2) permits a best-interest finding without proof of every Holley factor if clear and convincing evidence supports it.

K. B. v. Texas Department of Family and Protective Services · filed 2020-04-29(b)(2)

The Department need not prove all the Holley factors as a “condition precedent” to termination, and the absence of some factors does not bar the factfinder from finding by clear and convincing evidence that termination is in a child’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the child’s best interest; the court may consider the evidence as a whole when reviewing that finding.

in the Interest of A.C.P.T., a Child · filed 2020-04-29(b)(2)

Viewing all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the best-interest finding and applying the Holley factors, we conclude that the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in A.C.P.T.’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires a finding that termination is in the child’s best interest; evidence supporting a statutory ground for termination can also support that finding.

in the Interest of L.N.J., Jr., a Child · filed 2020-04-30(b)(2)

Based on the record before us, we find the trial court’s firm belief or conviction that termination of L.N.J., Sr.’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests is supported by clear and convincing evidence.

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

in the Interest of E.F.P. and A.R., Children · filed 2020-04-30(b)(2)

We hold that, based on clear and convincing evidence presented at trial and the Holley factors, the trial court could reasonably have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Appellant’s parental rights would be in the best interest of both children.

Section 161.001(b)(2) 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 Z.T., a Child · filed 2020-08-05(b)(2)

Because we find that the evidence was legally and factually sufficient to support the trial court’s best-interest finding and that Mother waived her waiver or estoppel complaint, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Section 161.001(b)(2) requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the children’s best interest; continued drug use, missed visits, and a stable placement can support that finding.

in the Interest of A.R., M.R., K.G.D.R., Children v. . · filed 2020-08-24(b)(2)

To terminate parental rights pursuant to section 161.001 of the Texas Family Code, the Department has the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence: (1) one of the predicate grounds in subsection 161.001(b)(1); and (2) that termination is in the best interest of the children. ... Having reviewed the record and considered all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude the trial court could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’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; a parent’s recent progress does not prevent a finding supported by continued drug use and past endangering conduct.

in the Interest of K.C., a Child · filed 2020-09-08(b)(2)

The Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution and section 161.001 of the Texas Family Code require application of the heightened standard of clear and convincing evidence in cases involving involuntary termination of parental rights. ... Thus, legally and factually sufficient evidence supported the court’s findings that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the best interest of K.C.

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

in the Interest of K.C., J.C., and K.C., Children · filed 2020-09-16(b)(2)

Considering the Holley factors and viewing all the evidence, we conclude that the trial court could have reasonably formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Mother’s parental rights was in the children’s best interests. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.001(b)(2).

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

in the Interest of H.L., a Child · filed 2020-10-08(b)(2)

For a trial court to terminate a parent–child relationship, the party seeking termination must prove two elements by clear and convincing evidence: (1) that the parent’s actions satisfy one ground listed in Family Code Section 161.001(b)(1); and (2) that termination is in the child’s best interest.

Section 161.001(b)(2)’s best-interest requirement can be satisfied by evidence of unresolved substance abuse and an inability to provide a safe, stable home, even when the children are bonded with the parent.

in the Interest of N.R.B-E., A.S.M.B.D., A.L.B-D., A.B., Children · filed 2020-10-28(b)(2)

While the caseworker testified the children were bonded with their mother, having reviewed the record and considered all the evidence in the appropriate light for each standard of review, we conclude the jury could have formed a firm belief or conviction that termination of Appellant Mother’s parental rights was in her children’s best interest.

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

in the Interest of K.D.L. and J.B.C. · filed 2020-11-05(b)(2)

The evidence is legally and factually sufficient to support the jury’s finding that termination of Mother’s parental rights to both Kyle and Jill is in the children’s best interest by clear and convincing evidence.