Cited by

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

1357 citing documents.

Walter S. v. Elisa P., E.S. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶12 Parents have a “fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and management of their children.” ¶ 24 (2005).
Levi R. v. Dcs, E.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Levi R. v. Dcs, E.R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶18 “Parents possess a fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and management of their children.” ¶ 24 (2005) (citing Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 753 (1982); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Meagen G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Christopher B. v. Mia D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Christopher B. v. Mia D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶ 24 (2005) (citing Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 753-54 (1982)).
Meagen G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Once the juvenile court finds termination is warranted, the court “can presume that the interests of the parent and child diverge.” ¶ 35 (2005).
Adam C., Kalynn R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Angel L. v. Dcs, A.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Adam C., Kalynn R. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Angel L. v. Dcs, A.L. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
at 4 ¶ 15 ( ¶ 34 (2005)).
Veronica M. v. Dcs, J.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Veronica M. v. Dcs, J.M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
“Clear and convincing” means the grounds for termination are “highly probable or reasonably certain.” –85, ¶ 25 (2005) (citation omitted).
Bonna D. v. Chelsea M., P.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Bonna D. v. Chelsea M., P.D. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Martin J. v. Dcs, M.J. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Martin J. v. Dcs, M.J. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
“Clear and convincing” means the grounds for termination are “highly probable or reasonably certain.” –85, ¶ 25 (2005).
Alexander N. v. Angela N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Alexander N. v. Angela N. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Keira A. v. Dcs, A.T. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Keira A. v. Dcs, A.T. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Michael D., Turquoise P. v. Dcs, N.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Michael D., Turquoise P. v. Dcs, N.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
“Clear and convincing” means the grounds for termination are “highly probable or reasonably certain.” –85, ¶ 25 (2005).
Jessica S., Bret S. v. Brandy R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Roarke T. v. Sara K., M.T. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Jessica S., Bret S. v. Brandy R. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
“Clear and convincing” means the grounds for termination are “highly probable or reasonably certain.” –85, ¶ 25 (2005) (citation omitted).
Roarke T. v. Sara K., M.T. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Maria G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Maria G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Shelly W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Shelly W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Brionna J. v. Dcs, A.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Brionna J. v. Dcs, A.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Heather G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Heather G. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Ernest v. Carylee W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Kayser v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Ernest v. Carylee W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
“Clear and convincing” means the grounds for termination are “highly probable or reasonably certain.” -85, ¶ 25 (2005) (citation omitted).
Kayser v. Young Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶23 “Parents possess a fundamental liberty interest in the care, custody, and management of their children.” ¶ 24 (2005) (citing Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 753 (1982)).
Kristian v. v. Dcs, A.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Kristian v. v. Dcs, A.V. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Angela W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Angela W. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
John K. v. Dcs, C.Z. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
John K. v. Dcs, C.Z. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶ 22 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Shukura J., X'zavier F. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Latoya P. v. Dcs, K.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
Latoya P. v. Dcs, K.P. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶ 41 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Shukura J., X'zavier F. v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2022
¶ 22 (2005); Michael J. v. Ariz. Dep’t of Econ.
Timothy B. v. dcs/h.B. Ariz. 2022