Julie Eldredge v. Karen Taylor |
¶1 The only issue presented for this Court's consideration is whether the trial court erred in granting the defendant's motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction based on the plaintiff's lack of standing. Questions within the issue are (1) whether a person has standing to seek a best-interest-of-the-child hearing when the sole biological parent relinquished some of her parental rights to the pers... More... $0 (11-12-2014 - OK) |
In the Interest of M. L. H.-M., a child |
B.M. appeals the termination of his parental rights. B.M.âs counsel filed a brief in compliance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967), and Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). B.M. filed a pro se brief. We affirm. |
William E. Bolden v. John and Jane Doe |
¶1 William Bolden is the putative father of a child (J.S.) born in 2011. The case before us on appeal is an adoption proceeding involving John and Jane Doe, the would-be adoptive parents of J.S. Bolden tried to intervene in and object to the Doesâ adoption of J.S. He was barred from doing so because he failed to preserve his legal rights as a father by filing a paternity affidavit within the ti... More... $0 (11-04-2014 - UT) |
J.L.C. v. K.A.A. |
¶ 1 J.L.C. appeals the district courtâs order dismissing for lack of standing his petition to establish paternity. We conclude that R.P. v. K.S.W., 2014 UT App 38, 320 P.3d 1084, a case issued after the partiesâ principal briefs were filed in the present appeal, resolves all material issues against J.L.C. We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court. |
Jamie Michelle Clark v. Peter Andrew Clark |
¶1 Petitioner/Appellant Jamie Michelle Clark (Mother) seeks review of the trial court's order denying her motion to reconsider after denying her motion to reduce an alleged child support arrearage to judgment in the divorce action against Respondent/Appellee Peter Andrew Clark (Father). In this proceeding, Mother asserts the trial court erred as a matter of law and fact in refusing to grant her j... More... $0 (10-09-2014 - OK) |
In the Interest of A.J.L., A.R.L., A.A.R. and B.N.G., Children |
The Department of Family and Protective Services (âthe Departmentâ) filed its petition to terminate the parental rights of the mother and the fathers of the four subject children. This is an appeal by the mother, Ernestina, and one of the fathers, Abel, from the trial courtâs judgment terminating their parental rights. We affirm the judgment as to Abel. Because we conclude the evidence is le... More... $0 (09-25-2014 - TX) |
In the Interest of G.S., a child |
Appellant G.B.C. (the Father) appeals from the decree terminating his parental rights to a daughter, G.S. (the Child). The Father brings four issues arguing that (1) the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial; (2) the evidence is insufficient to support termination; (3) the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (the Department) failed to make reasonable efforts to reuni... More... $0 (09-23-2014 - TX) |
J.M. v. G.H. |
J.M. appeals from a judgment on reserved issues granting joint physical custody of |
In the Interest of A.E.D. |
In 1998, A.S., A.E.D.âs mother, filed a petition to establish that K.D. is the biological father of A.E.D. The parties signed an agreed decree of paternity, which adjudicated K.D. as a parent of A.E.D., appointed A.S. and K.D. as joint managing conservators, gave A.S. the exclusive right to establish A.E.D.âs primary residence, and ordered K.D. to pay child support. In 2011, the Texas Attorney... More... $0 (09-04-2014 - TX) |
Marilyn Rae Baskin v. Penny Bogan |
Indiana and Wisconsin are among the shrinking majority of states that do not recognize the va-lidity of same-sex marriages, whether contracted in these states or in states (or foreign countries) where they are law-ful. The states have appealed from district court decisions invalidating the statesâ laws that ordain such refusal. |
In the Interest of N.M.G., A Child |
Appellant father appeals the trial courtâs judgment terminating his parental rights to his child, N.M.G. The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (âthe Departmentâ) moved to have appellantâs parental rights terminated on a variety of grounds. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. §§ 161.001(1)(A)-(H), (J)-(K), (M)-(Q); 161.003(a) (West 2014). After a bench trial, the trial court found ap... More... $0 (09-02-2014 - TX) |
Michelle Scheller v. Salvatore Sollecito |
A mother seeks review of an order by a successor judge, which effectively vacated a final order in a paternity action. She argues the successor judge erred in sua sponte ordering a new trial in the paternity action unless the parties could reach an agreement on the wording of the final order. We agree and reverse. |
In the Interest of K.P., K.P. and K.P. |
After a bench trial, the trial court entered an order which terminated the parental rights of N.C. (Mother) and A.P. (Father) to their daughters, K.P., K.P., and K.P.1 See Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 161.001 (West 2014).2 In this appeal of the judgment terminating their parental rights, Mother raises three issues and Father raises seven issues. |
In re J.S. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. |
In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we will hold that there was insufficient |
In the Interest of A.M.M. |
A mother appeals from the order terminating her parental rights. She contends the evidence failed to prove she abandoned the child or that termination is in the best interest of the child. We conclude the district court properly terminated the motherâs parental rights on the ground of abandonment under Iowa Code section 600A.8(3)(b) (2011). We conclude termination of the motherâs parental righ... More... $0 (08-13-2014 - IA) |
In the Interest of K.R.L., a Minor Child |
Appellant K.K.L. appeals a decree, rendered after a bench trial, terminating the parent-child relationship between him and his minor daughter, K.R.L. Among its findings, the trial court determined that the evidence supported termination pursuant to Family Code section 161.002(b)(1) because Appellant, an âalleged father,â had not filed an admission of paternity after being served in the termina... More... $0 (08-08-2014 - ) |
J.M. v. G.H. |
J.M. appeals from a judgment on reserved issues granting joint physical custody of his son Joey to J.M. and G.H., Joeyâs mother, and allowing her to take Joey with her to live in Israel during the school year. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm. |
In re E.M. et al., Minors. |
James J. and Sarah J. appeal the denial of their petition to declare Sarah's three children free from the custody and control of the children's father, Christopher M. (Fam. Code, § 7822.)1 James and Sarah also contend that the court did not have jurisdiction to issue a temporary visitation order allowing Christopher to have supervised visitation with the children during the pendency, or upon dism... More... $0 (08-05-2014 - CA) |
Lilas Moua v. Pittullo, Howington, Barker, Abernathy, LLP |
Lilas Moua (appellant) appeals from a judgment entered after the trial court |
In The Interest of A.T., a minor child |
Troy J. Wilson and Georgette George-Wilson appeal the trial courtâs final decree terminating the parental rights of minor child A.T.âs parents and appointing the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (the âDepartmentâ) as sole managing conservator of A.T. The Wilsons argue on appeal that the trial court (1) abused its discretion in striking their petition to intervene because ... More... $0 (07-01-2014 - TX) |
In the Interest of J.K.B. and J.D.B., Minor Children |
Roy1 filed suit to terminate the parent-child relationship between him and J.K.B. and J.D.B., pursuant to Texas Family Code section 161.005. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 161.005 (Vernon 2014). The statute permits a man to terminate the parent-child relationship with a child if he satisfies certain statutory criteria |
In the Interest of D.M., a Child |
Appellant David M. appeals the trial courtâs order terminating his parental rights to his son, D.M. On appeal, he argues that (1) the trial courtâs order erroneously terminated his parental rights pursuant to section 161.002 of the Texas Family Code; and (2) the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support the trial courtâs finding that he constructively abandoned his son. We af... More... $0 (06-25-2014 - TX) |
In the Interest of R. N. P. and E. A. P. |
Adam Scott Perkins appeals the trial courtâs Order Establishing the Parent-Child Relationship and in Suit Affecting the Parent-Child Relationship (Order). The facts of this case are well known to the parties, and we do not recite them here. Further, because all dispositive issues are well settled in the law, we issue this memorandum opinion pursuant to rule 47.4 of the Texas Rules of Appellate P... More... $0 (06-25-2014 - TX) |
In re Marriage of Iris Turk and Steven Turk |
¶ 1 The issues in this case are (1) whether section 505 of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act (750 ILCS 5/505 (West 2012)) permits a trial court to award child support to a noncustodial parent and (2) if so, whether the circuit court abused its discretion when it awarded $600 per month in child support to the noncustodial parent here in addition to requiring the custodial paren... More... $0 (06-19-2014 - IL) |
In re Jonathan P., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. |
Appellant Juan P., (âFatherâ) the father of minor Jonathan P., appeals from an order of the juvenile dependency court denying Fatherâs Welfare and Institutions Code section 388,1 petition seeking custody of Jonathan P., or in the alternative, family reunification services. Before this court, Father argues that the court erred in failing to assess his request for custody pursuant to section 3... More... $0 (06-10-2014 - CA) |
Next Page |