A. The court shall hold a hearing on a petition filed pursuant to this article in as informal a manner as the requirements of due process and fairness permit. The prospective adoptive parent, the spouse of a prospective adoptive parent and the child to be adopted shall attend unless the court orders otherwise. The court shall allow persons who have a direct interest in the case, including invited guests of the adoptive family, to attend the hearing. The attendees shall not disclose the content of testimony provided at the hearing. Nothing in this subsection restricts the ability for the juvenile court or clerk of the court to communicate relevant case information with the family court or clerk of the court. The court may require the presence of other witnesses as it deems necessary.
B. The court shall make its findings based on a preponderance of the evidence. The court may consider any and all reports required by this article or ordered by the court pursuant to this article.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
3
cases, 2008–2016 · leading case:
Marco C. v. Sean C., 181 P.3d 1137 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
Marco C. v. Sean C., 181 P.3d 1137 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“This assertion does not negate the finding the juvenile court made in its December 2007 order, entered after a hearing, that adoption of Baby G.”
In Re the Adoption of A.R., A.-R., & -A.-R., 387 P.3d 1285 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “In this case, the judgment had not been rendered at the time of Joyce’s death; indeed, the hearing required by A.R.S. § 8-115 had not yet been held. Under such circumstances, no delay having been occasioned by the court and no judgment previously having been filed, a judgment…”
Marco C. v. Sean C. & Colleen C. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“This 10 assertion does not negate the finding the juvenile court made in its December 2007 order, entered after a hearing, that adoption of Baby G.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-115(B) — 2 cases
Marco C. v. Sean C., 181 P.3d 1137 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“This assertion does not negate the finding the juvenile court made in its December 2007 order, entered after a hearing, that adoption of Baby G.”
Marco C. v. Sean C. & Colleen C. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2008).
“This 10 assertion does not negate the finding the juvenile court made in its December 2007 order, entered after a hearing, that adoption of Baby G.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.