Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Maine opinions name it 1 courts 2015–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Maine courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
In re Caleb M.green2 sentences2017Because, contrary to the father’s contention, the evidence supports the court’s factual findings and the court did not abuse its discretion in determining that termination is in the children’s best interest, we affirm the judgment. [¶ 2] The court found by clear and convincing evidence that the father was unable to protect the children from jeopardy or to take responsibility for them within a time reasonably calculated to meet their needs, and that it was in the children’s best interest for his parental rights to be terminated. 22 M.R.S. § 4055(1)(B)(2)(a), (b)(i)-(ii); see In re Caleb M., 201 2017Because, contrary to the father’s contention, the evidence supports the court’s factual findings and the court did not abuse its discretion in determining that termination is in the children’s best interest, we affirm the judgment. [¶ 2] The court found by clear and convincing evidence that the father was unable to protect the children from jeopardy or to take responsibility for them within a time reasonably calculated to meet their needs, and that it was in the children’s best interest for his parental rights to be terminated. 22 M.R.S. § 4055(1)(B)(2)(a), (b)(i)-(ii); see In re Caleb M., 201 | 4 | 4 |
In re Children of Jason C.green1 sentence2020See In re Children of Jason C., 2020 ME 86, ¶¶ 7, 10 , --- A.3d ---. [¶2] Although we affirm the judgment, we note that in its termination order the court, in addition to making express factual findings pursuant to M.R. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maine. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Trever I.
green
2 sentences2015The father argues that the court abused its discretion in denying his motion to continue, see In re Trever I., 2009 ME 59, ¶ 28 , 973 A.2d 752 , and that denial of the motion improperly affected his right to counsel in the termination hearing, see 22 M.R.S. § 4005(2) (2014). 2015The father argues that the court abused its discretion in denying his motion to continue, see In re Trever I., 2009 ME 59, ¶ 28 , 973 A.2d 752 , and that denial of the motion improperly affected his right to counsel in the termination hearing, see 22 M.R.S. § 4005(2) (2014). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.