In Norman v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, the supreme court held that a court may not accept a party’s offer as proof of the facts if the opposing party objects. The Department of Health & Social Services Office of Children’s Services (OCS) initiated proceedings to terminate a father’s parental rights. The father attended the initial proceeding and requested a trial for the following week, then left during a break in the proceedings. OCS proceeded with its offer of proof for terminating the father’s rights, to which the father’s attorney objected. Nevertheless, the court accepted the offer of proof, stating that the father’s departure indicated he no longer wanted a trial. The court then terminated the father’s rights. On appeal, OCS argued that the father had waived his due process rights by leaving the proceedings. The supreme court held that because the father’s attorney objected to the offer of proof, the father had not waived his rights. The attorney’s objection indicated that the father wanted to go to trial and did not intend to relinquish his parental rights. The supreme court vacated the lower court’s termination order and remanded the case, holding that a court may accept an offer of proof only if there is no objection from any of the parties present at the proceeding.