Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Christina G. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security, 256 P.3d 628.

255 citing documents.

Charles v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Sec., ¶ 13 (App. 2011), and do not reweigh the evidence on appeal, Yvonne L. v. Ariz. Dep't of Econ.
Tiffany L. v. Dcs, I.J. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Tiffany L. v. Dcs, I.J. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Sec., ¶ 15 (App. 2011); accord Mary Ellen C. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Justin A. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Justin A. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Eberardo L. v. Dcs, A.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Eberardo L. v. Dcs, A.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Sec., ¶¶ 14–15 (App. 2011).
Deborah S. v. Dcs, M.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Deborah S. v. Dcs, M.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
Rodriguez v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Rodriguez v. Garcia Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., ¶ 13 (App. 2011) (citing Jesus M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Rachael A. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Rachael A. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
“The juvenile court is to consider the availability of reunification services to the parent and his or her participation in those services, and must find that [DCS] made a diligent effort to provide such services.” ¶ 14 (App. 2011).
Lucia D. v. Dcs, R.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Lucia D. v. Dcs, R.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., ¶ 15 (App. 2011) (quoting Maricopa County Juv.
Norman S. v. Dcs, N.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Vincent S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Norman S. v. Dcs, N.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Vincent S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Amber M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Amber M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., ¶¶ 14–15 (App. 2011) (citation omitted).
State v. Bergen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
State v. Bergen Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Michelle H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Michelle H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., ¶ 15 (App. 2011), nor is it required to wait an indefinite period before moving for termination, Maricopa Cty.
Sara K. v. Dcs, N.K. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sara K. v. Dcs, N.K. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Brandon H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Brandon H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., ¶ 14 n.6 (App. 2011)).
Tiffani G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Tiffani G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sec., ¶ 14 (App. 2011) (quotation omitted).
Kathryn v. Dcs, A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Kathryn v. Dcs, A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§ 8-533(B)(8)’s requirement that DCS provide diligent reunification services does not require DCS to undertake futile efforts); ¶ 25 (App. 2011) (affirming termination even though DCS did not request a hearing to determine if services were futile); Maricopa County Juv.
Jennifer S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Jennifer S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Quinton v. v. Dcs, A.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Quinton v. v. Dcs, A.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 14 n.6 (App. 2011) (recognizing that the failure to develop an argument on appeal results in abandonment and waiver of the issue) ( n.9, ¶ 101 (2004)).
Tina v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Tina v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 27 (App. 2011); Linda V. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Mary Jean M. v. Dcs, E.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Mary Jean M. v. Dcs, E.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., –37 ¶¶ 21–25 (App. 2011).
Thomas M. v. Danette G., G.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Thomas M. v. Danette G., G.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 13 (App. 2011) (“The juvenile court is in the best position to weigh the evidence, observe the parties, judge the credibility of witnesses, and make appropriate findings”).
Francisco v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Francisco v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 14 n.6 (App. 2011) (failure to develop argument on appeal results in abandonment and waiver of issue).
Vahidi v. Hosseini Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Vahidi v. Hosseini Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Vanessa W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Vanessa W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 14 (App. 2011) (quoting Maricopa Cty.
Augustin C. v. Dcs, E.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018