Subscribe in a reader


Issaquah Law Group: Experienced Counsel; Client Focus

PHILOSOPHY: Formed in 2014, Issaquah Law Group is a law firm with one focus: providing businesses and insurers with high quality legal representation with the responsiveness of a smaller firm. ILG was founded on the principle that strong client relationships are the key to successful legal representation and strong relationships are built upon clear and consistent communication. 

LITIGATION: We work closely with our clients to fully and accurately understand their goals, work collaboratively to formulate specific legal strategies, and execute the agreed plan of action utilizing methods most likely to result in the efficient and effective resolution of the matter. ILG attorneys have a broad base of litigation experience to draw on in all Federal and State courts from on-the-ground investigations to Supreme Court appeals in the areas of personal injury and wrongful death, product liability, commercial general liability, labor & employment, construction litigation, and catastrophic losses due to fire and explosion.

BUSINESS LAW: Rarely is the path from point A to point B a straight line, so our role in a business law practice is to find alternatives, devise workable strategies, and keep your business ideas, goals and objectives moving toward realization. ILG’s business attorneys help clients achieve their goals with respect to business formation, intellectual property, labor and employment, CAN-SPAM, copyright and trademark

COMMUNITY: In addition, the Lawyers at Issaquah Law Group remain active in the legal and civic community. A core commitment of our Issaquah Attorneys is community service. Our attorneys' civic involvement includes the King County Civil Rights Commission; the City of Issaquah Planning Policy Commission; the Northwest Screenwriters Guild, service as a pro tem judge. We live and work in the Pacific Northwest, and we aim to make it a better place.

In addition, through The Amateur Law Professor Blog and LinkedIn postings, we share pertinent opinions and decisions of the Washington State Supreme Court, as well as the pertinent opinions and decisions of the Washington State Courts of Appeal so that our clients can be as update to date on cutting legal issues as we are.

Court of Appeals: Div. III – Court Affirms Termination of Mother’s Parental Rights

In re the Welfare of A.G. and L.S.

This was a very sad case. Ms. G is the mother of A.G. (now age 8) and L.S. (now age 5). The State removed the children from Ms. G’s care in 2005 and they were declared dependents in August 2005. In October 2006, Ms. G had another child (M.S.). M.S. never left the care of Ms. G and never lived with A.G. or L.S. In March 2007 the State petitioned to terminate Ms. G’s parental rights as to A.G. and L.S. The petition stated that the reasons for termination were drug and alcohol abuse, neglect of the children, domestic violence, and serious mental health problems. The facts set forth an ugly history. Ms. G made an effort to clean up her act, but the facts reflected that she just wouldn’t go 100% of the way. This was evidenced by her refusal to cooperate with mental health evaluations and urine tests for drugs. In addition, the assessments of the children’s attachment to their mother were not positive.

In the end, the court terminated Ms. G’s parental rights and disallowed any visitation between M.S. and the other two children. Ms. G appealed.

Unfortunately, the Court of Appeals agreed with the trial court and found that the evidence did support the trial court’s findings and affirmed those findings. However, the Court of Appeals did reverse the trial court’s order regarding the visitation between M.S. and the other two children. The court did not have jurisdiction over M.S. because he was not a party to the action. A little silver lining.

What I found strange about this case was the fact that in the midst of terminating the parental rights of the mother as to two of her children, the third child was completely ignored. If she wasn’t a fit parent as to two of the children, then why was she allowed to keep the third?

Subscribe in a reader

Copyright 2014-2018 by Issaquah Law Group, PLLC. Powered by Squarespace. Background image by jakeliefer.