jurisdictional judgment framework (Oregon) · Go Syfert
← Oregon issues

jurisdictional judgment framework in Oregon

11 Oregon opinions name it 3 courts 2013–2022 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Oregon 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Department of Human Services v. N. T.green
orctapp · 2012 · cited in 11 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2013–2022
2 sentences

2022“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of each question—that is, both DHS’s efforts and a parent’s progress are evaluated by reference to the facts that formed the bases for juvenile court jurisdiction.” Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012).

2022“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of each question—that is, both DHS’s efforts and a parent’s progress are evaluated by reference to the facts that formed the bases for juvenile court jurisdiction.” Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012).

411
Department of Human Services v. S. S.green
orccmultnomah · 2016 · cited in 2 Oregon opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017S., 267 Or App 301, 310 , 340 P3d 142 (2014), and the juvenile court must evaluate those efforts through the lens of the “adjudicated bases for jurisdiction,” S. S., 278 Or App at 738 ; see also Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012) (“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of each question—that is, both DHS’s efforts and a parent’s progress are evaluated by reference to the facts that formed the bases for juvenile court jurisdiction.”).

2017K., 257 Or App 409, 418 , 306 P3d 763 (2013), with reference to the “adjudicated bases for jurisdiction,” S. S., 278 Or App at 738 ; see also Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012) (“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of each question— that is, both DHS’s efforts and a parent’s progress are evaluated by reference to the facts that formed the bases for juvenile court jurisdiction.”).

12

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oregon. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
Department of Human Services v. M. K. green
orctapp · 2013
2 sentences

2017K., 257 Or App 409, 418 , 306 P3d 763 (2013), with reference to the “adjudicated bases for jurisdiction,” S. S., 278 Or App at 738 ; see also Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012) (“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of each question— that is, both DHS’s efforts and a parent’s progress are evaluated by reference to the facts that formed the bases for juvenile court jurisdiction.”).

2017K., 257 Or App 409, 418 , 306 P3d 763 (2013), with reference to the “adjudicated bases for jurisdiction,” S. S., 278 Or App at 738 ; see also Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012) (“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of each question— that is, both DHS’s efforts and a parent’s progress are evaluated by reference to the facts that formed the bases for juvenile court jurisdiction.”).

12017–2017
Department of Human Services v. T. S. neutral
orctapp · 2014
1 sentence

2017S., 267 Or App 301, 310 , 340 P3d 142 (2014), and the juvenile court must evaluate those efforts through the lens of the “adjudicated bases for jurisdiction,” S. S., 278 Or App at 738 ; see also Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012) (“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of each question—that is, both DHS’s efforts and a parent’s progress are evaluated by reference to the facts that formed the bases for juvenile court jurisdiction.”).

12017–2017
State v. R. J. H. neutral
orctapp · 2014
1 sentence

2017S., 267 Or App 301, 310 , 340 P3d 142 (2014), and the juvenile court must evaluate those efforts through the lens of the “adjudicated bases for jurisdiction,” S. S., 278 Or App at 738 ; see also Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012) (“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of each question—that is, both DHS’s efforts and a parent’s progress are evaluated by reference to the facts that formed the bases for juvenile court jurisdiction.”).

12017–2017
Department of Human Services v. D. L. H. green
orctapp · 2012
2 sentences

2016H., 251 Or App 787, 799 , 284 P3d 1233 , modified on recons, 253 Or App 600 , 292 P3d 565 (2012), rev den, 353 Or 445 (2013), and, particularly, the adjudicated bases for jurisdiction, Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012) (“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of [the sufficiency of DHS’s efforts.]”).

2016H., 251 Or App 787, 799 , 284 P3d 1233 , modified on recons, 253 Or App 600 , 292 P3d 565 (2012), rev den, 353 Or 445 (2013), and, particularly, the adjudicated bases for jurisdiction, Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012) (“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of [the sufficiency of DHS’s efforts.]”).

12016–2016
Department of Human Services v. D. L. H. green
orctapp · 2012
2 sentences

2016H., 251 Or App 787, 799 , 284 P3d 1233 , modified on recons, 253 Or App 600 , 292 P3d 565 (2012), rev den, 353 Or 445 (2013), and, particularly, the adjudicated bases for jurisdiction, Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012) (“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of [the sufficiency of DHS’s efforts.]”).

2016H., 251 Or App 787, 799 , 284 P3d 1233 , modified on recons, 253 Or App 600 , 292 P3d 565 (2012), rev den, 353 Or 445 (2013), and, particularly, the adjudicated bases for jurisdiction, Dept. of Human Services v. N. T., 247 Or App 706, 715 , 271 P3d 143 (2012) (“The particular issues of parental unfitness established in the jurisdictional judgment provide the framework for the court’s analysis of [the sufficiency of DHS’s efforts.]”).

12016–2016

Statutes the citing opinions construe

OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.476 (10) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.340 (4) OR § Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.100 (3)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check