Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite In Re the Appeal in Cochise County Juvenile Action No. 5666-J, 650 P.2d 459.

119 citing documents.

Arizona Department of Economic Security v. Superior Court 832 P.2d 705 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1992
In the Matter of the Appeal in Cochise County Juvenile Action No. 5666-J
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. JA 33794 828 P.2d 1231 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. JA 33794 828 P.2d 1231 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
Matter of Juvenile Action No. 5666-J, , Department of Economic Security v. Mahoney, 24 Ariz.App.
In re the Appeal Yuma County Juvenile Action 815 P.2d 424 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
In re the Appeal Yuma County Juvenile Action 815 P.2d 424 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1991
In In re Cochise County Juvenile Action No. 5666-J, -59 , -61 (1982), the court held that the standard of proof in dependency proceedings is a preponderance of the evidence.
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-500274 804 P.2d 730 Ariz. 1990
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-500274 804 P.2d 730 Ariz. 1990
1208 , 31 L.Ed.2d 551 (1972); Matter of Appeal in Cochise County Juvenile Action No. 5666-J, , Appeal in Pima County Juvenile Action No. J-46735 v. Howard
In re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JD-500325 788 P.2d 1206 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
In re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JD-500325 788 P.2d 1206 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Rule 17, Arizona Rules of Procedure for Juvenile Court; Matter of Appeal in Cochise County Juvenile Action No. 5666-J, , reh’g denied, Sept.
In re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-500274 785 P.2d 588 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
In re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-500274 785 P.2d 588 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
In Matter of Appeal in Cochise County Juvenile Action No. 5666-J, , the supreme court in noting that termination is an irrevocable decision held that: The permanency of the termination dictates that it be resorted to only in the most extreme cases.
Stewart v. Superior Court 787 P.2d 126 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
Stewart v. Superior Court 787 P.2d 126 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1989
See, e.g., In re Cochise County Juvenile Action No. 5666-J, , (parental custodial rights are not absolute; superior state interest must be shown).
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-6520 756 P.2d 335 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-6520 756 P.2d 335 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1988
Bechtel v. Rose in and for Maricopa County 722 P.2d 236 Ariz. 1986
Bechtel v. Rose in and for Maricopa County 722 P.2d 236 Ariz. 1986
See also In the Matter of the Appeal in Cochise County Juvenile Action No. 5666-J, , (the right to raise one’s family is an essential, basic right).
In re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-4283 653 P.2d 55 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
In re the Appeal in Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-4283 653 P.2d 55 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1982
In the Matter of the Appeal in Cochise County Juvenile Action No. 5666-J