Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Mary Lou C. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security, 83 P.3d 43.

892 citing documents.

Caterina W. v. Anthony R., S.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Logan B. v. Dcs 422 P.3d 1072 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 17 (App. 2004), under our case law these principles have been applied only in cases in which the termination order contained written factual findings.
Sean M., Mary K. v. Dcs, M.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sean M., Mary K. v. Dcs, M.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Brittany P., Andres G. v. Dcs, N.G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Vanessa W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Brittany P., Andres G. v. Dcs, N.G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 19 (App. 2004) (finding that the best interests requirement may be satisfied if there is credible evidence of an adoptive plan or the child is adoptable).
Vanessa W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Augustin C. v. Dcs, E.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Joseph C. v. Dcs, J.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Joseph C. v. Dcs, J.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 19 (App. 2004) (finding a court must either find that a child will affirmatively benefit from the severance or that a continued relationship with a parent will harm the child).
Augustin C. v. Dcs, E.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Monica v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Monica v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 19 (App. 2004) (“The best interest requirement may be met if .
C.D. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Tzsiah E. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Linda B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Tzsiah E. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
C.D. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 19 (App. 2004) (citation omitted).
Linda B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Lucian B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Lucian B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Titus S. v. Dep't of Child Safety 418 P.3d 1138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
Titus S. v. Dep't of Child Safety 418 P.3d 1138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
¶ 8, or upon a determination that, as a matter of law, no reasonable fact-finder could have found the evidence satisfied the applicable burden of proof, Denise R. , , ¶¶ 9-10, .
James H. v. Dcs, L.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
James H. v. Dcs, L.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Donetrius W. v. Dcs, P.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Donetrius W. v. Dcs, P.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Danielle M. v. Dcs, T.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Danielle M. v. Dcs, T.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Rocco R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Rocco R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Jessica M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Jessica M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 18 (App. 2004), and Mother provides no evidence or supporting authority demonstrating that further rehabilitative services could restore her ability to care for the children within a reasonable time, see Jennifer G., 211 Ariz. at 453 n.3, ¶ 12 (citing Mary Ellen C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Penny G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Penny G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Edward S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Jered W. v. Dcs, M.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Edward S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Jered W. v. Dcs, M.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Shannon S. v. Dcs, A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Elizabeth v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Shannon S. v. Dcs, A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Elizabeth v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Mychel E. v. Dcs, A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Mychel E. v. Dcs, A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Laura L. v. Dcs, J.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Laura L. v. Dcs, J.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Nicholas T. v. Dcs, K.N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Joshua H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017