In Re C.E.K. In Re C.E.K.

In Re C.E.K‪.‬

214 S.W.3D 492, 2006.TX.0009658

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Descrição da editora

Candace Keith (Mother) appeals the trial courts judgment terminating her parental rights to her two sons, C.E.K. and C.D.K. In eight issues, she contends the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support a finding that (1) Mother knowingly placed or allowed the children to remain in conditions that endangered them, (2) she engaged in conduct or knowingly placed the children with a person who engaged in conduct that endangered them, or (3) termination of her parental rights was in the childrens best interest; the trial court erred in admitting certain testimony; and it was error to terminate Mothers parental rights, as the trial court had discretion to preserve her rights and still safeguard the best interest of the children. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse the decree of termination and dismiss the suit affecting the parent-child relationship.

GÉNERO
Profissional e técnico
LANÇADO
2006
14 de novembro
IDIOMA
EN
Inglês
PÁGINAS
23
EDITORA
LawApp Publishers
TAMANHO
60,4
KB

Mais livros de Supreme Court Of Utah

Benny Fatt v. Utah State Tax Commission Benny Fatt v. Utah State Tax Commission
1994
Emerald Oil Co. v. State Tax Commission Emerald Oil Co. v. State Tax Commission
1954
Dillon Smith v. Utah Central Credit Union Dillon Smith v. Utah Central Credit Union
1986
Kirchgestner v. Denver & Rio Grande Kirchgestner v. Denver & Rio Grande
1951
Richard Rousay v. Board Review Industrial Richard Rousay v. Board Review Industrial
1987
Utah Power and Light Company v. Public Utah Power and Light Company v. Public
1985