Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Kent K. v. Bobby M., 110 P.3d 1013.

1357 citing documents.

Edan A. v. Dcs, A.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Edan A. v. Dcs, A.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Kathryn v. Dcs, A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§ 8-537(B); –84, ¶ 19 (2005).
David v. v. Steve v. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
David v. v. Steve v. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
against the independent and often adverse interests of the child in a safe and stable home life.” ¶ 35 (2005).
Casha C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Casha C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§ 8-533(B); ¶ 22 (2005).
Karla M. v. Larry J. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Karla M. v. Larry J. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
A party seeking termination of a parent-child relationship must prove the existence of a statutory ground under § 8-533(B) by clear and convincing evidence, Michael J., 196 Ariz. at 249, ¶ 12, and, by a preponderance of the evidence, that termination is in the best interests of the child, ¶ 41 (2005).
Rick R. v. Dcs, H.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Rick R. v. Dcs, H.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Amanda B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Amanda B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§§ 8-533(B), -537(B); -82, 288, ¶¶ 7, 41 (2005).
Amberlayne S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Amberlayne S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
lity of the circumstances, ¶ 12 (App. 2016), and balances the parent's rights "against the independent and often adverse interests of the child in a safe 3 AMBERLAYNE S. v. DCS, et al. Decision of the Court and stable home life," ¶ 35 (2005).
Anthony L. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Jesus R., Deanna C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Marsha M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Maria D. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Maria D. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§ 8-537(B), and find by a preponderance of evidence that termination is in a child’s best interests, ¶ 41 (2005).
Marsha M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§ 8-537(B), and that termination is in a child’s best interests by a preponderance of evidence, ¶ 41 (2005).
Jesus R., Deanna C. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§ 8-533(B); ¶ 22 (2005).
Anthony L. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Delcia F. v. Dcs, Z.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Delcia F. v. Dcs, Z.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
“Clear and convincing” means the grounds for termination are “highly probable or reasonably certain.” -85, ¶ 25 (2005).
Sarah R. v. Dcs, Z.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
David P. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Sarah R. v. Dcs, Z.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
David P. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶20 Once the juvenile court has found one of the statutory termination grounds by clear and convincing evidence, “we can presume that the interests of the parent and child diverge.” Alma S. v. Dep’t of Child Safety, ¶ 12 (2018) ( ¶ 35 (2005)).
Ramiro A. v. Dcs, J.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Ramiro A. v. Dcs, J.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§ 8-533(B), Michael J., 196 Ariz. at 249, ¶ 12, and, by a preponderance of the evidence, that termination is in the best interests of the child, ¶ 41 (2005).
Robert O. v. Mary B., A.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Monique H. v. Dcs, Et El. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Monique H. v. Dcs, Et El. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Robert O. v. Mary B., A.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Lessie N., James D. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Jason O. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Jason O. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Lessie N., James D. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Juana C. v. Dcs, J.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Juana C. v. Dcs, J.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Ct. 66(C); - 50, ¶ 8 (2018) ( ¶ 22 (2005)).
Savoca v. Savoca Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Savoca v. Savoca Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
¶7 "Parents possess a fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and management of their children," ¶ 24 (2005).
Denisse P. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Denisse P. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
§§ 8-533(B), -537(B); -82, 288, ¶¶ 7, 41 (2005).
Eryca L. v. Dcs, R.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Eryca L. v. Dcs, R.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019
Crosby-Garbotz v. Hon. fell/state Ariz. 2019
Crosby-Garbotz v. Hon. fell/state Ariz. 2019
§ 1-601(A); ¶ 24 (2005) (citing Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 753 (1982)), and a child’s best interest, including “an interest in a ‘normal family home,’” see Kent K., 210 Ariz. at 286 ¶ 34 (quoting Santosky, 455 U.S. at 759).
Darrin v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2019