Department of Human Services v. J. L. J.

To preserve an error for appeal, “‘a party must provide the trial court with an explanation of [his or her] objection that is specific enough to ensure that the court can identify its alleged error with enough clarity to permit it to consider and correct the error immediately.’” Senvoy, LLC v. Employment Dept., 312 Or App 387, 388-39, ___ P3d ___ (2021) (quoting State v. Vanornum, 354 Or 614, 632, 317 P3d 889 (2013)).

Mother appealed a judgment from juvenile court establishing, over her child, a judgment of jurisdiction and disposition. Mother argued that the juvenile court erred when it ruled that she was not present at the hearing, and, therefore, J should not have been made a ward of the state. DHS argued that Mother did not preserve her error claims. To preserve an error for appeal, “‘a party must provide the trial court with an explanation of [his or her] objection that is specific enough to ensure that the court can identify its alleged error with enough clarity to permit it to consider and correct the error immediately.’” Senvoy, LLC v. Employment Dept., 312 Or App 387, 388-39, ___ P3d ___ (2021) (quoting State v.  Vanornum, 354 Or 614, 632, 317 P3d 889 (2013)). The court found that she did not “raise[] the “issue that now argues on appeal,” and, therefore, the argument was not preserved. Affirmed.