Dept. of Human Services v. K.M.

“Evaluating a motion to set aside a judgment under ORS 419B.923(1)(b) entails a two-step process. First, the court must determine whether the parent has established excusable neglect. Second, if the court determines that a parent has established excusable neglect, it must then decide whether to exercise its discretion to grant the motion to set aside.” Dept. of Human Services v. J.J.J., 317 Or App 188, 190 (2022).

Mother appeals the juvenile court’s denial of her motion to set aside the judgment of jurisdiction, arguing she demonstrated excusable neglect for not attending the hearing. The juvenile court held a rescheduling call on March 16, 2023 that Mother was 30 minutes late for, and a second call on April 20, 2023 that Mother was not on time for. The juvenile court allowed ODHS to proceed with a prima facie case. Mother was seen in the courthouse 40 minutes after the scheduled hearing began. “Evaluating a motion to set aside a judgment under ORS 419B.923(1)(b) entails a two-step process. First, the court must determine whether the parent has established excusable neglect. Second, if the court determines that a parent has established excusable neglect, it must then decide whether to exercise its discretion to grant the motion to set aside.” Dept. of Human Services v. J.J.J., 317 Or App 188, 190 (2022). A parent’s “reasonable, good faith mistake as to the time or place of a dependency proceeding” may constitute excusable neglect under ORS 419B.923(1)(b). Mother argued her habitual lateness and the failure of court staff directing her to the correct courtroom was excusable neglect. The Court found there was no evidence that Mother’s lateness was connected to finances or difficulties with public transportation. The Court held Mother failed to demonstrate excusable neglect as a matter of law because she failed to demonstrate a nexus between her failure to appear and a reasonable ground for that failure sufficient to establish excusable neglect. Affirmed.