DHS v. A.C.S.G.

“An appeal is moot when a decision will no longer ‘have a practical effect on the rights of the parties[,]" and DHS has that burden of proof. Dept. of Human Services v. G.D.W., 292 P3d 548 (2012). Under ORS 419B.639(2)(a), DHS is only required to send notice of the first scheduled hearing, and any subsequent hearing scheduled to accommodate a request for an extension does not require a new notice.

Appellant’s minor children were removed by the Department of Human Services (DHS) and jurisdiction was found pursuant to the Oregon Indian Child Welfare Act (ORICWA) and the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). Appellant assigned error.

DHS argued that the case was moot because the court dismissed jurisdiction and wardship. The Court found that “[a]n appeal is moot when a decision will no longer ‘have a practical effect on the rights of the parties[,]’” and that DHS failed to adequately meet that threshold. Dept. of Human Services v. G.D.W., 292 P3d 548 (2012). 

Appellant argued that she was not given proper notice required by ORICWA/ICWA for a jurisdiction hearing. ORS 419B.651(2)(a) requires that in jurisdictional proceedings involving an Indian child, prompt notice must be sent to the parent by registered or certified mail. However, the Court found that under ORS 419B.639(2)(a), DHS was only required to send notice of the first scheduled hearing. Because the subsequent hearing was scheduled to accommodate the Appellant’s request for an extension, a new notice was not required. 

Further, Appellant argued that ORS 419B.645 requires DHS to make “active efforts” to prevent the breakup of a family involving an Indian child, and that DHS had failed to do so. The court must make an “active efforts” determination based on a higher than “reasonable efforts” standard. Because the court made the required “active efforts” determination during each shelter hearing, there was no violation of Appellant’s rights.