Cited by
Opinions in Arizona that cite Frank R. v. Mother Goose Adoptions, 367 P.3d 88.
- Layton v. Layton Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2026
- Butler v. Larosk Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
-
Butler v. Larosk
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2024
¶ 27 (App. 2016), affirmed in relevant part, vacated in part, ¶ 37 (2017).
- Mongco T., Jack v. v. Dcs, J.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Mongco T., Jack v. v. Dcs, J.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Maria O. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Maria O. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
- Frank R. v. Mother Goose Adoptions Ariz. 2017
-
Frank R. v. Mother Goose Adoptions
Ariz. 2017
Stanford, Judge No. S20140221 AFFIRMED Opinion of the Court of Appeals, Division Two VACATED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART COUNSEL: Sarah Michèle Martin (argued), Tucson, Attorney for Frank R. John J. Egbert (argued), Kerry A. Hodges, Jennings, Strouss & Salmon, P.L.C., Phoenix, Attorneys for Mother Goose Adoptions Patrick Lacroix, Arizona Children's Law, LLC, Tucson, Attorney
- Michael M. v. Katie A., E.O. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Michael M. v. Katie A., E.O. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Jessica H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Jessica H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Tasha T. v. Dcs, E.T. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Tasha T. v. Dcs, E.T. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- David S. v. Dcs, K.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
-
David S. v. Dcs, K.S.
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Reviewing the juvenile court’s order for an abuse of discretion, ¶ 21 (App. 2016), we reject this argument.
- Michael T. v. Dcs, J.E. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- Michael T. v. Dcs, J.E. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
- E.O. v. Michael M., Katie A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
- E.O. v. Michael M., Katie A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
- Armida E. v. Dcs, B.E. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
- Armida E. v. Dcs, B.E. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
- Shawn B. v. Dcs, S.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
-
Shawn B. v. Dcs, S.B.
Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
We do not reweigh the evidence on appeal because the juvenile court is in the best position to “weigh the evidence, observe the parties, judge the credibility of witnesses, and make appropriate findings.” ¶ 58 (App. 2016) (quoting Jesus M. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
- Carrie M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
- Carrie M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
- Adrian E. v. Department of Child Safety 369 P.3d 264 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2016