Cited by

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

1357 citing documents.

Chase M. v. Dcs, J.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
§ 8-537(B), and by a preponderance of the evidence that termination of the parent-child relationship is in a child’s best interests, ¶ 22 (2005).
Sean M., Mary K. v. Dcs, M.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
§ 8-533(B); -82, ¶¶ 7, 41 (2005).
Albert D. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Brittany P., Andres G. v. Dcs, N.G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Brittany P., Andres G. v. Dcs, N.G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Crystal F. v. Dcs, L.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Crystal F. v. Dcs, L.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
§ 8-533(B); ¶ 22 (2005).
Monica v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Monica v. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Patrick G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Patrick G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
§§ 8-533(B), -537(B), ¶ 22 (2005)).
Jeuda K. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Tzsiah E. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Linda B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Tzsiah E. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Linda B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Jeuda K. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Gabrial G. v. Dcs, G.G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Gabrial G. v. Dcs, G.G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Sec., ¶ 12 (2000), and proof by a preponderance of the evidence that termination is in the best interests of the child, ¶ 41 (2005).
Angelina D. v. Dcs, D.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Angelina D. v. Dcs, D.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
is 'protecting a child's interest in stability and security.'" Demetrius L., 239 Ariz. at 4, ¶ 15 ( ¶ 34 (2005)).
Lucian B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Lucian B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
¶ 41 3Absent material revisions after the relevant dates, statutes and rules cited refer to the current version unless otherwise indicated.
Titus S. v. Dep't of Child Safety 418 P.3d 1138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
Titus S. v. Dep't of Child Safety 418 P.3d 1138 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2018
§§ 8-533(B), 8-537(B) ; Kent K. v. Bobby M. , , ¶ 41
Eric R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Eric R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Donetrius W. v. Dcs, P.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Donetrius W. v. Dcs, P.W. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Christine F. v. Ryan C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Christine F. v. Ryan C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
See Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) §§ 8–533(B), –537(B)2; –82, 288, ¶¶ 7, 41 (2005).
Robert A. v. Dcs, R.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Wayne W., Patricia B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Wayne W., Patricia B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
§ 8-537(B), and by a preponderance of evidence that termination is in a child’s best interests, ¶ 41 (2005).
Robert A. v. Dcs, R.A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
A preponderance of the evidence standard allocates the risk of error equally between parties and requires that the juvenile court “determine whether a fact sought to be proved is more probable than not.” ¶ 25 (2005).
Danielle M. v. Dcs, T.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Danielle M. v. Dcs, T.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
§ 8–533(B)(8)(c); ¶ 41 (2005).
Brittany W., Ryan W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Rocco R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Brittany W., Ryan W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Rocco R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Jessica M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Leo H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Leo H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
§ 8-533 statutory grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence); ¶ 22 (2005) (stating that the court must also find, by a preponderance of the evidence, that severance is in the child’s best interests).
Jessica M. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
-82, ¶ 7 (2005) (requiring clear and convincing evidence of at least one statutory ground under A.R.S.
Penny G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Penny G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018
Brenda D. v. Dep't of Child Safety 410 P.3d 419 Ariz. 2018
Brenda D. v. Dep't of Child Safety 410 P.3d 419 Ariz. 2018
See Santosky, 455 U.S. at 753, 758–59 (“[P]arents retain a vital interest in preventing the irretrievable destruction of their family life.”); ¶ 24 (2005).
Edward S. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2018