In the Interests of Tiffany
Wisconsin Court of Appeals
214 Wis. 2d 302, 571 N.W.2d 872 (1997)

- Written by Deanna Curl, JD
Facts
On September 5, 1990, Tiffany was born to Patty and Allen (defendants) who are biological siblings. On March 31, 1994, Patty and Allen abandoned Tiffany in the care of a sitter and could not be located after she became sick. The Milwaukee County Department of Human Services subsequently removed Tiffany from Patty and Allen’s care, and she was placed in a foster home. After Patty and Allen failed to make sufficient progress for the next year to have Tiffany returned to their care, the state filed a petition to terminate Patty and Allen’s parental rights in April 1996. At a trial on the petition, testimony from various experts and social workers established that Tiffany had profound developmental and physical delays, but the fact that she had made progress while in foster care established that the delays were attributable, at least in part, to neglect. Testimony established that Tiffany was not bonded to Patty and that Allen had been uncooperative with reunification services. The evidence also established that Tiffany was one of at least three children suspected to have been born of Patty and Allen’s incestuous relationship. The trial court ultimately terminated Patty and Allen’s parental rights under a provision of the state statute based on their incestuous parenthood. Patty and Allen then appealed the judgment of the trial court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Schudson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.