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.
12 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2026 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Texas 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 MGDgreen2 sentences2026See In re S.A.W., 131 S.W.3d 704, 709 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, no pet.) (holding termination to be in child’s best interest despite mother’s lifestyle improvements and eventual compliance with service plan); In re M.G.D., 108 S.W.3d 508, 515 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. denied) (holding that a parent’s “recent turnaround” and compliance with a service plan are factors that should be considered when determining best interest but are not solely determinative). f. 2026See In re S.A.W., 131 S.W.3d 704, 709 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, no pet.) (holding termination to be in child’s best interest despite mother’s lifestyle improvements and eventual compliance with service plan); In re M.G.D., 108 S.W.3d 508, 515 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. denied) (holding that a parent’s “recent turnaround” and compliance with a service plan are factors that should be considered when determining best interest but are not solely determinative). 7. | 5 | 10 |
In Re SAW, Jr.green2 sentences2026See In re S.A.W., 131 S.W.3d 704, 709 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, no pet.) (holding termination to be in child’s best interest despite mother’s lifestyle improvements and eventual compliance with service plan); In re M.G.D., 108 S.W.3d 508, 515 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. denied) (holding that a parent’s “recent turnaround” and compliance with a service plan are factors that should be considered when determining best interest but are not solely determinative). f. 2026See In re S.A.W., 131 S.W.3d 704, 709 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, no pet.) (holding termination to be in child’s best interest despite mother’s lifestyle improvements and eventual compliance with service plan); In re M.G.D., 108 S.W.3d 508, 515 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. denied) (holding that a parent’s “recent turnaround” and compliance with a service plan are factors that should be considered when determining best interest but are not solely determinative). 7. | 3 | 3 |
in the Interest of O.N.H., Childrengreen1 sentence2024See In re O.N.H., 401 S.W.3d 681, 684 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013, no pet.) (“[I]t is proper to measure a parent’s future conduct by his or her past conduct to determine whether termination is in the child’s best interest.”); In re M.G.D., 108 S.W.3d 508, 515 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2003, pet. denied) (holding that a parent’s “recent turnaround” and compliance with a service plan are factors jurors should consider in a determination of best interest but are not determinative); see also In re S.A.W., 131 S.W.3d 704, 709 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, no pet.) (holding termination in child’s be | 1 | 1 |
in the Interest of S.R., S.R. and B.R.S., Childrengreen1 sentence2019See In re S.R., 452 S.W.3d at 367 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re VV
green
1 sentence2022In re M.K., No. 02-19-00459-CV, 2020 17 WL 1949629 , at *6 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Apr. 23, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op.); In re V.V., 349 S.W.3d 548 , 553–54 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, pet. denied) (en banc op. on reh’g) (considering parent’s “lack of all contact with a child without any proffered excuse” in analyzing termination under subsection (E)). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
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.