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.
26 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 2016–2026 8 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa 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 the Interest of M.W. and Z.W., Minor Children, R.W., Mothergreen2 sentences2026Permissive exception “Once we have established that the termination of parental rights is in the children’s best interests, the last step of our analysis is to determine whether any exceptions in section 232.116(3) apply to preclude the termination.” In re M.W., 876 N.W.2d 212, 225 (Iowa 2016). 2026Permissive Exception “Once we have established that the termination of parental rights is in the children’s best interests, the last step of our analysis is to determine whether any exceptions in section 232.116(3) apply to preclude the termination.” In re M.W., 876 N.W.2d 212, 225 (Iowa 2016). | 8 | 23 |
In the Interest of A.M., Minor Child, A.M., Fathergreen2 sentences2022Statutory Exceptions Turning to the last step in the analysis, the mother argues “[t]he trial court failed to properly consider Iowa Code [s]ection 232.116(3)(b) and (c).” The exceptions contained in those provisions respectively allow the juvenile court to forego termination when “the child is over ten years of age and objects to the termination” or “[t]here is clear and convincing evidence that the termination would be detrimental to the child at the time due to the closeness of the parent-child relationship.” We first note the application of the statutory exception to termination is “permis 2017Exception to Termination “Once we have established that the termination of parental rights is in the children’s best interests, the last step of our analysis is to determine whether any exceptions in section 232.116(3) apply to preclude the termination.” In re M.W., 876 N.W.2d at 225 . “‘The factors weighing against termination in section 232.116(3) are permissive, not mandatory,’ and the court may use its discretion, ‘based on the unique circumstances of each case and the best interests of the child, whether to apply the factors in this section to save the parent-child relationship.’” In re A | 5 | 7 |
In The Interest Of D.W., Minor Child, A.M.W., Mothergreen2 sentences2022In re D.W., 791 N.W.2d 703, 707 (Iowa 2010). 2016D.W., 791 NW.2d at 707 . | 1 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.