may not be cited except as provided by
Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (1998).
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of the Welfare of:
D.P.O. and J.R.B.
Filed March 9, 1999
Affirmed and Motion Granted
Kandiyohi County District Court
File No. J69751119
John L. Kallestad, P.O. Box 1126, Willmar, MN 56201 (for appellant Kandiyohi County)
John E. Mack, Mack & Daby, P.A., P.O. Box 302, New London, MN 56273 (for respondent mother)
Bonnie Kleman, 2015 First St. S., Suite 114, Willmar, MN 56201 (for children)
Considered and decided by Davies, Presiding Judge, Peterson, Judge, and Halbrooks, Judge.
This appeal arises from a district court order charging appellant Kandiyohi County with the expenses of respondent's appeal from an order terminating her parental rights. We affirm and grant respondent's motion to strike and for sanctions.
The Kandiyohi County District Court terminated the parental rights of respondent Mary Rodriguez. Respondent was represented by the public defender in that proceeding, but the public defender would not pursue an appeal. The district court granted respondent's request that it appoint counsel to represent her in the appeal, and ordered appellant Kandiyohi County to pay for respondent's appointed appellate counsel. This appeal from that order followed.
Appellant argues that the trial court incorrectly construed statutory law in charging it with the expenses of respondent's appeal and erred by charging such expenses without taking evidence. Statutory construction is a question of law reviewed de novo. Hibbing Educ. Ass'n v. Public Employment Relations Bd., 369 N.W.2d 527, 529 (Minn. 1985).
Appellant argues that Minn. Stat. § 563.01 (1998), which governs in forma pauperis proceedings, also governs the assignment of expenses for respondent's appointed counsel and demands a different result. But section 260.251, which is specific to juvenile proceedings, is the applicable statute because this was a juvenile case. See Minn. Stat. § 645.26, subd. 1 (1998) (where statutes appear to conflict courts shall interpret them to give effect to both or make specific an exception to the general). The district court did not err by applying section 260.251.
The argument in appellant's reply brief was also unsupported by the record. An argument that is unfounded is subject to a sanction awarding attorney fees. Minn. Stat. § 549.211 (1998). Appellant's reply brief is stricken and we award respondent $300 in attorney fees.
Affirmed and motion granted.