The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed a Nicholas County circuit court's order terminating a mother's parental and custodial rights to her two children, rejecting her arguments that she should have been granted an improvement period before the termination.

In a memorandum decision filed Jan. 29, 2026, the high court upheld the Circuit Court of Nicholas County's March 3, 2025, order terminating Mother K.F.'s parental and custodial rights to J.C. and E.C. The court determined that oral argument was unnecessary and issued the brief decision affirming the lower court's ruling.

The case stems from a complex history involving domestic violence allegations and previous appeals. The Department of Health and Human Services initially filed a petition concerning the mother's history of domestic violence and a specific incident between the mother and J.S., who is the father of J.C. and E.C.'s half-sibling.

According to court records, at the time of the initial proceedings, J.C. and E.C. primarily resided in the care of their non-abusing father. During adjudication hearings, the circuit court found that the children were abused and neglected, despite the fact that no evidence was presented regarding J.C.'s and E.C.'s direct exposure to domestic violence.

The case has a complicated procedural history that includes previous appeals to the state's highest court. Following a dispositional hearing in September 2023, the court initially terminated the mother's parental and custodial rights to J.C. and E.C., as well as to their half-sibling. The mother appealed that September 18, 2023, dispositional order.

In a previous ruling, the Supreme Court of Appeals had vacated the September 2023 order along with the court's prior adjudicatory orders and remanded the matter back to the lower court. The case was referenced in a prior Supreme Court decision, *In re B.H.*, which was decided in September 2024.

Following the remand, the circuit court conducted new proceedings that ultimately led to the March 2025 order again terminating the mother's parental rights. This time, the mother appealed the termination order, arguing that the circuit court made two critical errors in its decision-making process.

First, the mother argued that the circuit court erred in failing to grant her an improvement period. Under West Virginia law, courts have discretion to grant improvement periods to parents in certain circumstances, allowing them additional time to address the conditions that led to the abuse and neglect findings. The mother contended that she should have been afforded such an opportunity.

Second, the mother challenged the termination of her rights altogether, arguing that the circuit court's decision to terminate her parental and custodial rights was improper under the circumstances of the case.

However, the Supreme Court of Appeals rejected both arguments in its memorandum decision. The court's brief ruling affirmed the circuit court's March 2025 order without providing detailed analysis of the mother's arguments, indicating that the justices found the lower court's reasoning and conclusions to be legally sound.

The case highlights the complex nature of family court proceedings involving domestic violence allegations and the high standards required for terminating parental rights in West Virginia. Termination of parental rights is considered one of the most serious actions a court can take, as it permanently severs the legal relationship between a parent and child.

The mother was represented by counsel Brandy L. Hughart throughout the proceedings, while the Department of Health and Human Services was represented by the state Attorney General's office. The case was assigned number 25-223 at the Supreme Court level, corresponding to lower court case numbers CC-34-2023-JA-59 and CC-34-2023-JA-60 in Nicholas County.

The memorandum decision format used by the court indicates that the justices viewed the legal issues as sufficiently straightforward that they did not require oral argument or a full written opinion with detailed legal analysis. This procedural approach is typically reserved for cases where the law is well-established and the lower court's application of that law was clearly correct.

The ruling represents the final resolution of this particular custody matter, as the mother's appeals have been exhausted at the state level. The termination of parental rights means that the mother no longer has any legal relationship with J.C. and E.C., and the children remain in the custody arrangements that were established by the lower court.

The case underscores the state's commitment to protecting children in situations involving domestic violence, even when the children themselves may not have been direct victims of abuse. West Virginia courts have consistently held that exposure to domestic violence can constitute child abuse and neglect, justifying state intervention to protect children's welfare.