Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Marianne N. v. Department of Child Safety, 381 P.3d 264.

26 citing documents.

Philip W. v. Dcs, J.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Philip W. v. Dcs, J.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Decision of the Court N. v. DCS (“Marianne I”), ¶¶ 16–17 (App. 2016) (no abuse of discretion where the parent was provided Form 3 notice and only assertion of good cause was a mistake regarding the date of the pretrial conference), opinion vacated in part, Marianne II, 243 Ariz. at 59, ¶ 32.
Edward S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Edward S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
2“We view the facts in the light most favorable to upholding the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights.” n.1, ¶ 1 (App. 2016) (citing Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Marianne N. v. dcs/o.N./i.T./a.G. Ariz. 2017
Marianne N. v. dcs/o.N./i.T./a.G. Ariz. 2017
No. CV-16-0259-PR Filed September 25, 2017 Appeal from the Superior Court in Coconino County The Honorable Margaret A. McCullough, Judge No. JD2009-0008 AFFIRMED Opinion of the Court of Appeals, Division One VACATED IN PART COUNSEL: Chad Joshua Winger (argued), Harris & Winger, P.C., Flagstaff; Attorneys for Marianne N. Mark Brnovich, Arizona Attorney General, Dominic E. Draye, Solicitor General, Nicholas Chapman-Hushek (argued), JoAnn Falgout, Assistant Attorney Generals, Phoenix
Miguel D. v. Dcs, M.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Miguel D. v. Dcs, M.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
CS subsequently filed a petition alleging Child was dependent as to Father on the grounds of abuse and neglect.2 Child was initially placed with a DCS-licensed foster home in Phoenix but subsequently relocated to Tucson to reside with Father’s uncle in 1 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to upholding the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights.” n.1, ¶ 1 (App. 2016) (citing Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Janine E. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Janine E. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
2 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to upholding the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights.” n.1, ¶ 1 (App. 2016) (citing Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
David S. v. Dcs, K.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
David S. v. Dcs, K.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
(review granted in part April 18, 2017).
Rebekah G. v. Katy C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Rebekah G. v. Katy C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
2 “We view the facts in the light most favorable to upholding the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights.” n.1, ¶ 1 (App. 2016) (citing Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Jason v. v. Dcs, J.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Jason v. v. Dcs, J.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
n.1, ¶ 1 (App. 2016) (citing Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Nicole M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Nicole M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
See Marianne N. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, n.1, ¶ 1 (App. 2016) (citing Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Joel M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Joel M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Marianne N. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, n.1, ¶ 1 (App. 2016) (citing Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Martha C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Martha C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
See Marianne N. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, n.1, ¶ 1 (App. 2016) (citing Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Brenda D. v. Department of Child Safety 393 P.3d 930 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Brenda D. v. Department of Child Safety 393 P.3d 930 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
A parent who has waived his or her right to contest DOS’s factual allegations by failing to appear, nonetheless “retains [his or] her rights, through counsel, to attend and participate in the termination hearing, pose evidentiary objections, cross-examine witnesses, and present evidence relevant to the child’s best interests.” ¶ 13 , (emphasis added).
Kayoma S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Kayoma S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Marianne N. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, n.1, ¶ 1 (App. 2016) (citing Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.