Cited by

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

1369 citing documents.

Catrina K. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Brittnie C., Procoro R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Catrina K. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
§ 8-533(B); ¶ 22 (2005).
Lindsay A., Andrew W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Lindsay A., Andrew W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Parental rights may not be severed absent “fundamentally fair procedures.” ¶ 24 (2005) (citation omitted).
Alma S. v. Dep't of Child Safety 418 P.3d 925 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Shontal K. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Alma S. v. Dep't of Child Safety 418 P.3d 925 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Kent K. v. Bobby M. , , 280, 288, ¶¶ 1, 41, , 1014, 1022 (2005).
Shontal K. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Sergio v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Sergio v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep't of Econ.
Samiuddin v. Hon. nothwehr/state Ariz. 2017
Samiuddin v. Hon. nothwehr/state Ariz. 2017
The Mathews test, ¶ 29 (2005), requires courts to consider three factors in assessing whether procedural due process requires additional safeguards such as an evidentiary hearing: (1) the private interest affected; (2) “the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if an
Odin S. v. Dcs, A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Odin S. v. Dcs, A.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Sec., ¶ 12 (2000); ¶ 41 (2005).
Mary C. v. Dcs, J.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Mary C. v. Dcs, J.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Lynda H. v. Dcs, J.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Amber D. v. Dcs, C.E. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Lynda H. v. Dcs, J.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
§ 8-533(B); ¶ 22 (2005).
Amber D. v. Dcs, C.E. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Christopher H., Arxit B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Christopher H., Arxit B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Victor B., Elizabeth B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Jesus R. v. Dcs, J.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Willard E. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Willard E. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
§ 8-537(B), and that DCS has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that termination is in a child’s best interests, ¶ 22 (2005).
Jesus R. v. Dcs, J.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
§ 8-533(B)(4); ¶ 22 (2005) (clear and convincing evidence standard).
Victor B., Elizabeth B. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Jessica M. v. Dcs, A.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Jessica M. v. Dcs, A.B. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 22 (2005) (requiring a finding by a preponderance of the evidence that termination is in a child’s best interests).
Ryan H. v. Dcs, B.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Amber S. v. Dcs, L.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Amber S. v. Dcs, L.C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Ryan H. v. Dcs, B.H. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Michelle M. v. Dcs, H.N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Amal A., Abdulsalam T. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Amal A., Abdulsalam T. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Michelle M. v. Dcs, H.N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
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
Miguel D. v. Dcs, M.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Miguel D. v. Dcs, M.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Jessica H. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Janine E. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Janine E. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Rebekah G. v. Katy C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Rebekah G. v. Katy C. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017
Ricardo R. v. Maria A. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2017