Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Michael J. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security, 995 P.2d 682.

1245 citing documents.

Carolina H. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 307 P.3d 996 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Sec., ¶ 11 , Maricopa Cnty.
Calvin B. v. Brittany B. 304 P.3d 1115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Calvin B. v. Brittany B. 304 P.3d 1115 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2013
Lisa K. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 281 P.3d 1041 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Lisa K. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 281 P.3d 1041 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2012
Mario G. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 257 P.3d 1162 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Mario G. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 257 P.3d 1162 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Christina G. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 256 P.3d 628 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Christina G. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 256 P.3d 628 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2011
Kenneth B. v. Tina B. 243 P.3d 636 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Kenneth B. v. Tina B. 243 P.3d 636 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Sec., , 249 n. 2, ¶¶ 15, 17, , 685 n. 2 (2000).
Raymond F. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 231 P.3d 377 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Raymond F. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 231 P.3d 377 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Sec., ¶ 20 , (citation omitted).
Arizona Department of Economic Security v. Matthew L. 225 P.3d 604 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Arizona Department of Economic Security v. Matthew L. 225 P.3d 604 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2010
Sec., -52, ¶ 29 , -88 (2000).
Antonio M. v. Ades and Daniel M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
Antonio M. v. Ades and Daniel M. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2009
Bobby G. v. Ades & Allison G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
Bobby G. v. Ades & Allison G. Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2008
Sec., (“To justify termination of the parent- child relationship, the trial court must find, by clear and convincing evidence, at least one of the statutory grounds set out in section 8-533 .
Christy C. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 153 P.3d 1074 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
Christy C. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 153 P.3d 1074 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2007
¶ 1 , to a juvenile court’s decision to sever parental rights because of a felony sentence “of such length that the child will be deprived of a normal home for a period of years.” Ariz. Rev.Stat.
Margaret H. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 148 P.3d 1174 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
Margaret H. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 148 P.3d 1174 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2006
Jennifer G. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 123 P.3d 186 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
Jennifer G. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 123 P.3d 186 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2005
Mindful of the fundamental parental rights at stake in a severance action, we do not hesitate to apply these standards with exactitude.
LINDA v. v. ARIZONA DEPT. OF ECONOMIC SEC. 117 P.3d 795 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
LINDA v. v. ARIZONA DEPT. OF ECONOMIC SEC. 117 P.3d 795 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Sec., ¶ 11 , Matter of Juv.
Steven K. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 113 P.3d 1240 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Steven K. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 113 P.3d 1240 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Kent K. v. Bobby M. 110 P.3d 1013 Ariz. 2005
Kent K. v. Bobby M. 110 P.3d 1013 Ariz. 2005
P.2d 682 (2000), we stated that “[t]o justify termination of the parent-child relationship, the trial court must find, by clear and convincing evidence, at least one of the statutory grounds set out in section 8-533, and also that termination is in the best interest of the child.” Id.
James H. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 106 P.3d 327 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
James H. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 106 P.3d 327 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Thus, , is implicated by our decision and do not address our concurring colleague’s concerns.
Arizona Department of Economic Security v. Oscar O. 100 P.3d 943 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
Arizona Department of Economic Security v. Oscar O. 100 P.3d 943 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2004
Ct., 17B A.R.S.; Michael J. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security, 196 Ariz. 246, and the party seeking termination bears the burden of persuasion, In re Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-6831, P.2d 785 (App. 1988).
Mary Lou C. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 83 P.3d 43 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Mary Lou C. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 83 P.3d 43 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2004
Jesus M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 53 P.3d 203 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
Jesus M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 53 P.3d 203 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
Sec., , In re Maricopa County Juvenile Action No. JS-8490
Michael M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 42 P.3d 1163 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
Michael M. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 42 P.3d 1163 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2002
Minh T. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 41 P.3d 614 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
Minh T. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security 41 P.3d 614 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2001
In Re the Marriage of Dorman 9 P.3d 329 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2000
In Re the Marriage of Dorman 9 P.3d 329 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 2000
Sec., , (court will accept trial court’s best interest finding when not challenged on appeal).