Wisconsin Statutes

Wis. Stat. § 48.424 (2026)

Fact-finding hearing

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
48.42448.424Fact-finding hearing.
48.424(1)(1)The purpose of the fact-finding hearing is to determine in cases in which the petition was contested at the hearing on the petition under s. 48.422 all of the following:
48.424(1)(a)(a) Whether grounds exist for the termination of parental rights.
48.424(1)(b)(b) Whether the allegations specified in s. 48.42 (1) (e) have been proved in cases involving the involuntary termination of parental rights to an Indian child.
48.424(2)(2)The fact-finding hearing shall be conducted according to the procedure specified in s. 48.31 except as follows:
48.424(2)(a)(a) The court may exclude the child from the hearing.
48.424(2)(b)(b) The hearing shall be closed to the public.
48.424(3)(3)If the facts are determined by a jury, the jury may only decide whether any grounds for the termination of parental rights have been proved and whether the allegations specified in s. 48.42 (1) (e) have been proved in cases involving the involuntary termination of parental rights to an Indian child. The court shall decide what disposition is in the best interest of the child.
48.424(4)(4)If grounds for the termination of parental rights are found by the court or jury, the court shall find the parent unfit. A finding of unfitness shall not preclude a dismissal of a petition under s. 48.427 (2). Except as provided in s. 48.23 (2) (b) 3., the court shall then proceed immediately to hear evidence and motions related to the dispositions enumerated in s. 48.427. Except as provided in s. 48.42 (2g) (ag), the court may delay making the disposition and set a date for a dispositional hearing no later than 45 days after the fact-finding hearing if any of the following apply:
48.424(4)(a)(a) All parties to the proceeding agree.
48.424(4)(b)(b) The court has not yet received a report to the court on the history of the child as provided in s. 48.425 and the court now orders an agency enumerated in s. 48.069 (1) or (2) to file that report with the court, or, in the case of an Indian child, now orders that agency or requests the tribal child welfare department of the Indian child’s tribe to file such a report, before the court makes the disposition on the petition.
48.424(5)(5)If the court delays making a permanent disposition under sub. (4), it may transfer temporary custody of the child to an agency for placement of the child until the dispositional hearing. Placement of an Indian child under this subsection shall comply with the order of placement preference under s. 48.028 (7) (b) or, if applicable, s. 48.028 (7) (c), unless the agency finds good cause, as described in s. 48.028 (7) (e), for departing from that order.
48.424 HistoryHistory: 1979 c. 330; 1987 a. 383; 2009 a. 94; 2013 a. 337.
48.424 AnnotationAlthough the best interests of the child standard does not apply to the fact-finding hearing, the guardian ad litem can represent the interests of the child to develop the facts as they relate to whether the grounds for termination exist. When a jury is the fact-finder, the guardian ad litem should be permitted to exercise peremptory challenges in jury selection. Waukesha County Department of Social Services v. C.E.W., 124 Wis. 2d 47, 368 N.W.2d 47 (1985).
48.424 AnnotationDespite jury findings that grounds for termination exist, the court may dismiss a termination petition if evidence does not support the jury’s finding or if the evidence of unfitness is not so egregious as to warrant termination; whether the evidence supports termination is a matter of discretion. B.L.J. v. Polk County Department of Social Services, 163 Wis. 2d 90, 470 N.W.2d 914 (1991).
48.424 AnnotationOnce a basis for termination has been found by the jury and confirmed with a finding of unfitness by the court, the court must move to the dispositional hearing in which the prevailing factor is the best interests of the child. A court should not dismiss a petition for termination at a dispositional hearing unless it can reconcile dismissal with the best interests of the child. Sheboygan County Department of Health & Human Services v. Julie A.B., 2002 WI 95, 255 Wis. 2d 170, 648 N.W.2d 402, 01-1692.
48.424 AnnotationWhile not required, circuit courts in termination of parental rights proceedings are urged to consider personally engaging the parent in a colloquy explaining that a stipulation to an element withdraws that element from the jury’s consideration and determining that the withdrawal of that element from the jury is knowing and voluntary. Walworth County Department of Health & Human Services v. Andrea L.O., 2008 WI 46, 309 Wis. 2d 161, 749 N.W.2d 168, 07-0008.
48.424 AnnotationA parent was deprived of the right to a jury trial when the court, rather than the jury, answered one of the verdict questions on an element of parental unfitness. Although counsel had stipulated that the element was satisfied, the parent had not agreed to the stipulation in open court, the required documentary evidence of the element was missing from the record, and the evidence adduced was not so “ample” as to make the element “undisputed and undisputable.” Manitowoc County Human Services Department v. Allen J., 2008 WI App 137, 314 Wis. 2d 100, 757 N.W.2d 842, 07-1494.
48.424 AnnotationThe circuit court is not obligated to inform the parent that by pleading no contest to grounds for termination the parent is waiving the constitutional right to parent or that the right to parent is a constitutional right. What is important is that the parent understands the import of the rights at stake rather than the sources from which they are derived. For a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent plea, the parent must be informed of the two independent dispositions available to the circuit court, dismissing the petition and terminating parental rights. Brown County Department of Human Services v. Brenda B., 2011 WI 6, 331 Wis. 2d 310, 795 N.W.2d 730, 10-0321.
48.424 AnnotationContrary to the Child’s Best Interest: Jury Trials in Children’s Court Proceedings. Sowinski & Wiensch. Wis. Law. Apr. 2013.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 149 cases (85 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case: Sheboygan Cnty. Dep't of Health & Human Servs. v. Julie A.B., 2002 WI 95 (Wis. 2002).
Sheboygan Cnty. Dep't of Health & Human Servs. v. Julie A.B., 2002 WI 95 (Wis. 2002). · cites it 24× “This finding was made at a fact-finding hearing under Wis. Stat. § 48.424 (1999-2000). 2 A "continuing need of protection or services" is one of the 11 grounds for termination of parental rights listed in § 48.”
Dane Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Ponn P., 2005 WI 32 (Wis. 2005). · cites it 28× “The court stated that severing the children's relationships with their parents would be beneficial to the children and that the children had strong relationships with caregivers in their current *178 placements.”
In Re the Termination of Parental Rights to Marquette S., 2007 WI 77 (Wis. 2007). · cites it 30× “We remand the cause to the circuit court for a fact-finding hearing in accordance with Wis. Stat. § 48.424 to determine whether grounds exist for termination of Bobby G.”
Dane Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Mable K., 2013 WI 28 (Wis. 2013). · cites it 16× “Wis. Stat. § 48.424 ; Shirley E., 298 Wis.”
Steven v. v. Kelley H., 2004 WI 47 (Wis. 2004). · cites it 10× “" Wis. Stat. § 48.424 (4); Julie A.B., 255 Wis.”
Evelyn C. R. v. Tykila S., 2001 WI 110 (Wis. 2001). · cites it 8× “" Wis. Stat. § 48.424 . During this step, the parent's rights are paramount.”
Brown Cnty. v. Shannon R., 2005 WI 160 (Wis. 2005). · cites it 8× “is able to meet the conditions established for the safe return of her children to the home within the 12-month period following the fact-finding hearing under Wis. Stat. § 48.424 ? If the circuit court erred in excluding the testimony, we must determine whether the error was…”
State v. Shirley E., 2006 WI 129 (Wis. 2006). · cites it 7× “" Wis. Stat. § 48.424 (4). During this phase, "the parent's rights are paramount.”
State v. C. L. K. (In re S.M.H.), 922 N.W.2d 807 (Wis. 2019). · cites it 5× “" Wis. Stat. § 48.424 (4). If the parent is found unfit, then (and only then) may the court proceed to the dispositional phase.”
Monroe Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Kelli B., 2004 WI 48 (Wis. 2004). · cites it 6× “Accordingly, pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 48.424 (4), the circuit court found her to be an unfit parent.”
Brown Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Brenda B., 2011 WI 6 (Wis. 2011). · cites it 8× “Wis. Stat. § 48.424 (1). During this first phase, the parent receives a full complement of procedural rights.”
In Interest of Christopher D., 530 N.W.2d 34 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 7× “Section 48.424(4), STATS., provides in part: If grounds for the termination of parental rights are found by the court or jury, the court shall find the parent unfit.”
— Wis. Stat. § 48.424(1) — 9 cases
In Re the Termination of Parental Rights to Marquette S., 2007 WI 77 (Wis. 2007). “We remand the cause to the circuit court for a fact-finding hearing in accordance with Wis. Stat. § 48.424 to determine whether grounds exist for termination of Bobby G.”
State v. Allen M., 571 N.W.2d 872 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997).
Deannia D. Ex Rel. Weiss v. Lamont D., 2005 WI App 264 (Wis. Ct. App. 2005).
Jackson Cnty. DHS v. M. M. B. (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).
Juneau Cnty. DHS v. R. M. (Wis. Ct. App. 2022).
— Wis. Stat. § 48.424(1)(a) — 14 cases
Dane Cnty. DHS v. J. R., 2020 WI App 5 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019).
Southdakota v. A.V. (In re M.D.), 927 N.W.2d 932 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019).
In re N. H., 928 N.W.2d 815 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019).
Juneau Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. S.G.M. (In re A.M.), 932 N.W.2d 195 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019).
— Wis. Stat. § 48.424(2) — 4 cases
In Re the Termination of Parental Rights to Marquette S., 2007 WI 77 (Wis. 2007). “We remand the cause to the circuit court for a fact-finding hearing in accordance with Wis. Stat. § 48.424 to determine whether grounds exist for termination of Bobby G.”
Dane Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Mable K., 2013 WI 28 (Wis. 2013). “Wis. Stat. § 48.424 ; Shirley E., 298 Wis.”
Matter of Parental Rights to Sueann Am, 500 N.W.2d 649 (Wis. 1993).
— Wis. Stat. § 48.424(3) — 15 cases
State v. B. W., 2024 WI 28 (Wis. 2024).
Jackson Cnty. DHS v. M. M. B. (Wis. Ct. App. 2021).
State v. J. D. R., Sr. (Wis. Ct. App. 2022).
Juneau Cnty. DHS v. R. M. (Wis. Ct. App. 2022).
Rusk Cnty. v. R. S. (Wis. Ct. App. 2023).
— Wis. Stat. § 48.424(4) — 91 cases
In Interest of Christopher D., 530 N.W.2d 34 (Wis. Ct. App. 1995). “Section 48.424(4), STATS., provides in part: If grounds for the termination of parental rights are found by the court or jury, the court shall find the parent unfit.”
Dane Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Ponn P., 2005 WI 32 (Wis. 2005). “The court stated that severing the children's relationships with their parents would be beneficial to the children and that the children had strong relationships with caregivers in their current *178 placements.”
State v. Allen M., 571 N.W.2d 872 (Wis. Ct. App. 1997).
Monroe Cnty. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Kelli B., 2004 WI 48 (Wis. 2004). “Accordingly, pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 48.424 (4), the circuit court found her to be an unfit parent.”
Steven v. v. Kelley H., 2004 WI 47 (Wis. 2004). “" Wis. Stat. § 48.424 (4); Julie A.B., 255 Wis.”
— Wis. Stat. § 48.424(8) — 1 case
Waukesha Cnty. Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. C.E.W., 368 N.W.2d 47 (Wis. 1985).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.