
    In the INTEREST OF P.T.D., a Child
    State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. P.T.D., Child, and T.P.D., Father, Respondents and A.R.D., Mother, Respondent and Appellant
    In the Interest of C.R.D., a Child
    State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. C.R.D., Child, and T.P.D., Father, Respondents and A.R.D., Mother, Respondent and Appellant
    In the Interest of P.A.D., a Child
    State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. P.A.D., Child, and T.P.D., Father, Respondents and A.R.D., Mother, Respondent and Appellant
    In the Interest of P.P.D., a Child
    State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. P.P.D., Child, and T.P.D., Father, Respondents and A.R.D., Mother, Respondent and Appellant
    In the Interest of N.A.D., a Child
    State of North Dakota, Petitioner and Appellee v. N.A.D., Child, and T.P.D., Father, Respondents and A.R.D., Mother, Respondent and Appellant
    No. 20180192 No. 20180193 No. 20180194 No. 20180195 No. 20180196
    Supreme Court of North Dakota.
    Filed January 15, 2019
    Frederick R. Fremgen, State's Attorney, Jamestown, ND, for petitioner and appellee.
    Kiara Kraus-Parr, Grand Forks, ND, for respondent and appellant.
   Per Curiam.

[¶1] A.D. appeals from a juvenile court order finding her five children to be deprived. On appeal, A.D. argues the juvenile court erred by finding the children to be deprived because the unsanitary and dangerous household has been cured by a move to a new home, any drug issues are now under control, there was no evidence she used drugs around the children, and the record does not contain any evidence her actions have negatively affected the children. We conclude the juvenile court's findings are not clearly erroneous. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Jon J. Jensen

Lisa Fair McEvers

Daniel J. Crothers

Jerod E. Tufte  