123 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 2010–2026 26 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee 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 Giorgianna H.green2 sentences2016State Dep’t of Children’s Servs. v. Mims, 285 S.W.3d [435,] 447-48 [(Tenn. Ct. App. 2008)]; In re Giorgianna H., 205 S.W.3d 508, 516 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006); In re S.M., 149 S.W.3d 632 , 640 n. 13 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). 2015State Dep’t of Children’s Servs. v. Mims, 285 S.W.3d [435,] 447-48 [(Tenn. Ct. App. 2008)]; In re Giorgianna H., 205 S.W.3d 508, 516 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006); In re S.M., 149 S.W.3d 632 , 640 n. 13 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). | 49 | 49 |
In Re Bernard T.green2 sentences2026We then “make [our] own determination regarding whether the facts, either as found by the trial court or as supported by a preponderance of the evidence, provide clear and convincing evidence that supports all the elements of the termination claim.” In re Bernard T., 319 S.W.3d at 596-97 . 2025We then “make [our] own determination regarding whether the facts, either as found by the trial court or as supported by a preponderance of the evidence, provide clear and convincing evidence that supports all the elements of the termination claim.” Inre Bernard T., 319 S.W.3d at 596-97 . | 7 | 73 |
In Re Carrington H.green2 sentences2024Whether “the evidence sufficiently supports termination of parental rights is a conclusion of law, which appellate courts review de novo with no presumption of correctness.” In re Carrington H., 483 S.W.3d 507, 524 (Tenn. 2016) (citing In re M.L.P., 281 S.W.3d 387, 393 (Tenn. 2009)). 2020A “trial court’s ruling that the evidence sufficiently supports termination of parental rights is a conclusion of law.” In re Carrington H., 483 S.W.3d at 524 . | 1 | 2 |
In Matter of MLPgreen1 sentence2024Whether “the evidence sufficiently supports termination of parental rights is a conclusion of law, which appellate courts review de novo with no presumption of correctness.” In re Carrington H., 483 S.W.3d 507, 524 (Tenn. 2016) (citing In re M.L.P., 281 S.W.3d 387, 393 (Tenn. 2009)). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Tiffany B.green1 sentence2014In re Tiffany B., 228 S.W.3d 148, 157 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2007). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re SM
green
2 sentences2016State Dep’t of Children’s Servs. v. Mims, 285 S.W.3d [435,] 447-48 [(Tenn. Ct. App. 2008)]; In re Giorgianna H., 205 S.W.3d 508, 516 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006); In re S.M., 149 S.W.3d 632 , 640 n. 13 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). 2015State Dep’t of Children’s Servs. v. Mims, 285 S.W.3d [435,] 447-48 [(Tenn. Ct. App. 2008)]; In re Giorgianna H., 205 S.W.3d 508, 516 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006); In re S.M., 149 S.W.3d 632 , 640 n. 13 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). | 49 | 2010–2016 |
State, Department of Children's Services v. Mims
green
2 sentences2011State, Dep’t of Children’s Servs. v. Mims, 285 S.W.3d at 447-48 ; In re Giorgianna H., 205 S.W.3d 508, 516 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2006); In re S.M., 149 S.W.3d 632 , 640 n. 13 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004). -16- Appellate courts conduct a de novo review of the trial court’s decisions regarding questions of law in termination proceedings. 2010State, Dep’t of Children’s Servs. v. Mims, 285 S.W.3d at 447-48 ; In re Giorgianna H., 205 S.W.3d 508, 516 (Tenn.Ct.App.2006); In re S.M., 149 S.W.3d 632 , 640 n. 13 (Tenn.Ct.App.2004). | 2 | 2010–2011 |
In Re Angela E.
green
1 sentence2015App. P. 13(d); In re Bernard T., 319 S.W.3d at 596 ; In re Angela E., 303 S.W.3d at 246 . ―In light of the heightened burden of proof in [termination] proceedings . . ., the reviewing court must then make its own determination regarding whether the facts, either as found by the trial court or as supported by a preponderance of the evidence, provide clear and convincing evidence that supports all the elements of the termination claim.‖ In re Bernard T., 319 S.W.3d at 596-97 . | 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.