DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Dominique M. v. Department of Child Safety, 376 P.3d 699.

287 citing documents.

  • Steven H. v. Dcs, M.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    “The existence and effect of a bonded relationship between a biological parent and a child, although a factor to consider, is not dispositive in addressing best interests.” Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12 (App. 5 STEVEN H. v. DCS, M.H.
  • Thomas K. v. Dcs, A.K. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Thomas K. v. Dcs, A.K. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Javier v. v. Dcs, J.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Javier v. v. Dcs, J.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, –99, ¶ 12 (App. 2016).
  • Monice C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Monice C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    Action No. S-2460, see also Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 11 (App. 2016) (recognizing a child may be harmed by the continuation of the parent-child relationship if the continued presence of a statutory severance ground negatively affects the child).
  • Jeanna T. v. Dcs, A.I. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Jeanna T. v. Dcs, A.I. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Janna G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Janna G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 6 (App. 2016).
  • Mario B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Mario B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    Dominique M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Child Safety, -99, ¶ 12 (App. 2016).
  • Troy W. v. Dcs, T.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Troy W. v. Dcs, T.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    Decision of the Court dispositive in addressing best interests.” Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12 (App. 2016).
  • Victor K. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Victor K. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    ¶13 Parental rights are terminable upon clear and convincing evidence, Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 7 (App. 2016), that a “parent has neglected or willfully abused a child,” A.R.S.
  • Nelturiah S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
  • Nelturiah S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2021
    Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, –99, ¶ 12 (App. 2016).
  • Desiree v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Desiree v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Valentyna S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Valentyna S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    Id.; Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 6 (App. 2016).
  • Cindy M. v. Claudio H., C.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Cindy M. v. Claudio H., C.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    The existence of a bond between biological family members, “although a factor to consider, is not dispositive in addressing best interests.” Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12 (App. 2016).
  • Timothy B., Michael M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Timothy B., Michael M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, -99, ¶¶ 10, 12 (App. 2016); see Audra T. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
  • Leticia P. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Brianna R., Jordan M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Brianna R., Jordan M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    However, the existence of a bond between biological family members, “although a factor to consider, is not dispositive in addressing best interests.” Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12 (App. 2016).
  • Leticia P. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    t and able to take care of the Children, and maintains that while the Children lived with her in Texas, she “cared for them, comforted them, had a good relationship with them, did not abuse them, and they were not afraid of her.” ¶13 In making a best interests finding, however, the juvenile court must “evaluate the totality of the circumstances.” Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12 (App. 2016).
  • Cassie F., Warren M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Cassie F., Warren M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Alexandra C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Alexandra C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, - 99, ¶ 12 (App. 2016).
  • Angelica B. v. Dcs, J.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Dawn B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Dawn B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    Dominique M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 6 (App. 2016).
  • Angelica B. v. Dcs, J.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    and developmental services” and eventually “allow[ed] a violent person” to care for him resulting in “severe[] harm[].” See Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, -99, ¶ 12 (App. 2016) (“The existence and effect of a bonded relationship between a biological parent and a child, although a factor to consider, is not dispositive in addressing best interests.”).
  • Melissa S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Melissa S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    “The existence and effect of a bonded relationship between a biological parent and a child, although a factor to consider, is not dispositive in addressing best interests.” Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, –99, ¶ 12 (App. 2016).
  • Darryl S. v. Dcs, D.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Jacob S. v. Dcs, A.F. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Jacob S. v. Dcs, A.F. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    §§ 8-533(B), -537(B); Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 7 (App. 2016).
  • Darryl S. v. Dcs, D.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Gabriel A., Heather M. v. Dcs, G.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Gabriel A., Heather M. v. Dcs, G.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Anthony A. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
  • Anthony A. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020
    Dominique M. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 8 (App. 2016).
  • Jessica P. v. Dcs, H.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2020