interests analysis in West Virginia

2024See also Syl. pt. 4, in part, Napoleon S., id. (“West Virginia Code [§ 49-4-114(a)(3) (eff. 2015)] provides for grandparent preference in determining adoptive placement for a child where parental rights have been terminated and also incorporates a best interests analysis within that 10 determination by including the requirement that the [DHS] find that the grandparents would be suitable adoptive parents prior to granting custody to the grandparents.”).

2022Va. 254 , 617 S.E.2d 801 (2005): West Virginia Code § [49-4-114(a)(3)] provides for grandparent preference in determining adoptive placement for a child where parental rights have been terminated and also incorporates a best interests analysis within that determination by including the requirement that the DHHR find that the grandparents would be suitable adoptive parents prior to granting custody to the grandparents.

1998Because the employee spoke out against the interests of his defense contractor employer during a press conference of a nonprofit organization of which he was a board member, the employer legitimately determined that the employee "had lost his effectiveness as its spokesperson." Id., at 372.

1998Because the employee spoke out against the interests of his defense contractor employer during a press conference of a nonprofit organization of which he was a board member, the employer legitimately determined that the employee “had lost his effectiveness as its spokesperson.” Id., at 372.

1987The Supreme Court of Connecticut in In re Juvenile Appeal, 177 Conn. 648, 671-72 , 420 A.2d 875, 886-87 (1979), aptly described the reason why the best interests rule is not applicable in a case involving the involuntary severance of parental rights: "In contrast to custody proceedings, in which the best interests of the child are always the paramount consideration and in fact usually dictate the outcome, in termination proceedings the statutory criteria must be met before termination can be accomplished and adoption proceedings begun.

1987The Supreme Court of Connecticut in In re Juvenile Appeal, 177 Conn. 648, 671-72 , 420 A.2d 875, 886-87 (1979), aptly described the reason why the best interests rule is not applicable in a case involving the involuntary severance of parental rights: "In contrast to custody proceedings, in which the best interests of the child are always the paramount consideration and in fact usually dictate the outcome, in termination proceedings the statutory criteria must be met before termination can be accomplished and adoption proceedings begun.