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.
10 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1894–2022 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
People in Interest of JLPgreen2 sentences2022On a related but somewhat different note, a Texas appellate court observed that applying the best interests standard to transfer decisions would “defeat[] the very purpose for which the ICWA was enacted, in that, it allows Anglo cultural biases into the analysis.” Yavapai-Apache Tribe v. Mejia, 906 S.W.2d 152, 169 (Tex. App. 1995); see also People In re J.L.P., 870 P.2d at 1257–58 (concluding that adoption of best interests of the child would defeat the purpose of ICWA); C.E.H., 837 S.W.2d at 953–54 (agreeing with the In re Armell court that best interests of the child considerations are inapp 2022On a related but somewhat different note, a Texas appellate court observed that applying the best interests standard to transfer decisions would “defeat[] the very purpose for which the ICWA was enacted, in that, it allows Anglo cultural biases into the analysis.” Yavapai-Apache Tribe v. Mejia, 906 S.W.2d 152, 169 (Tex. App. 1995); see also People In re J.L.P., 870 P.2d at 1257–58 (concluding that adoption of best interests of child would defeat the purpose of ICWA); C.E.H., 837 S.W.2d at 953–54 (agreeing with the In re Armell court that best interests of the child considerations are inapplica | 2 | 2 |
Yavapai-Apache Tribe v. Mejiagreen2 sentences2022On a related but somewhat different note, a Texas appellate court observed that applying the best interests standard to transfer decisions would “defeat[] the very purpose for which the ICWA was enacted, in that, it allows Anglo cultural biases into the analysis.” Yavapai-Apache Tribe v. Mejia, 906 S.W.2d 152, 169 (Tex. App. 1995); see also People In re J.L.P., 870 P.2d at 1257–58 (concluding that adoption of best interests of the child would defeat the purpose of ICWA); C.E.H., 837 S.W.2d at 953–54 (agreeing with the In re Armell court that best interests of the child considerations are inapp 2022On a related but somewhat different note, a Texas appellate court observed that applying the best interests standard to transfer decisions would “defeat[] the very purpose for which the ICWA was enacted, in that, it allows Anglo cultural biases into the analysis.” Yavapai-Apache Tribe v. Mejia, 906 S.W.2d 152, 169 (Tex. App. 1995); see also People In re J.L.P., 870 P.2d at 1257–58 (concluding that adoption of best interests of child would defeat the purpose of ICWA); C.E.H., 837 S.W.2d at 953–54 (agreeing with the In re Armell court that best interests of the child considerations are inapplica | 2 | 2 |
Chant v. Chantgreen2 sentences2001Moreover, "the best interests test is not intended to allow the court to micromanage a child's custody from the entry of the final judgment until the child becomes an adult.... [T]hese decisions should usually be made by the parents in private." Chant v. Chant, 725 So.2d 445, 448 (Fla. Dist.Ct.App.1999). 2001Moreover, “the best interests test is not intended to allow the court to micromanage a child’s custody from the entry of the final judgment until the child becomes an adult.... [Tjhese decisions should usually be made by the parents in private.” Chant v. Chant, 725 So.2d 445, 448 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1999). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Matter of TSgreen2 sentences2022But see In re T.S., 801 P.2d 77, 80 (Mont. 1990) (holding that best interests of the child test will be applied in determining good cause to transfer); In re Adoption of S.W., 41 P.3d 1003 , 1011–14 (Okla. 2022But see In re T.S., 801 P.2d 77, 80 (Mont. 1990) (holding that best interests of the child test will be applied in determining good cause to transfer); In re Adoption of S.W., 41 P.3d 1003 , 1011–14 (Okla. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Matter of Adoption of Halloway
green
2 sentences2022On a related but somewhat different note, a Texas appellate court observed that applying the best interests standard to transfer decisions would “defeat[] the very purpose for which the ICWA was enacted, in that, it allows Anglo cultural biases into the analysis.” Yavapai-Apache Tribe v. Mejia, 906 S.W.2d 152, 169 (Tex. App. 1995); see also People In re J.L.P., 870 P.2d at 1257–58 (concluding that adoption of best interests of the child would defeat the purpose of ICWA); C.E.H., 837 S.W.2d at 953–54 (agreeing with the In re Armell court that best interests of the child considerations are inapp 2022On a related but somewhat different note, a Texas appellate court observed that applying the best interests standard to transfer decisions would “defeat[] the very purpose for which the ICWA was enacted, in that, it allows Anglo cultural biases into the analysis.” Yavapai-Apache Tribe v. Mejia, 906 S.W.2d 152, 169 (Tex. App. 1995); see also People In re J.L.P., 870 P.2d at 1257–58 (concluding that adoption of best interests of child would defeat the purpose of ICWA); C.E.H., 837 S.W.2d at 953–54 (agreeing with the In re Armell court that best interests of the child considerations are inapplica | 2 | 2022–2022 |
In the Matter of Ceh v. Lmw
green
2 sentences2022On a related but somewhat different note, a Texas appellate court observed that applying the best interests standard to transfer decisions would “defeat[] the very purpose for which the ICWA was enacted, in that, it allows Anglo cultural biases into the analysis.” Yavapai-Apache Tribe v. Mejia, 906 S.W.2d 152, 169 (Tex. App. 1995); see also People In re J.L.P., 870 P.2d at 1257–58 (concluding that adoption of best interests of the child would defeat the purpose of ICWA); C.E.H., 837 S.W.2d at 953–54 (agreeing with the In re Armell court that best interests of the child considerations are inapp 2022On a related but somewhat different note, a Texas appellate court observed that applying the best interests standard to transfer decisions would “defeat[] the very purpose for which the ICWA was enacted, in that, it allows Anglo cultural biases into the analysis.” Yavapai-Apache Tribe v. Mejia, 906 S.W.2d 152, 169 (Tex. App. 1995); see also People In re J.L.P., 870 P.2d at 1257–58 (concluding that adoption of best interests of child would defeat the purpose of ICWA); C.E.H., 837 S.W.2d at 953–54 (agreeing with the In re Armell court that best interests of the child considerations are inapplica | 2 | 2022–2022 |
In Re Adoption of SW
green
2 sentences2022But see In re T.S., 801 P.2d 77, 80 (Mont. 1990) (holding that best interests of the child test will be applied in determining good cause to transfer); In re Adoption of S.W., 41 P.3d 1003 , 1011–14 (Okla. 2022But see In re T.S., 801 P.2d 77, 80 (Mont. 1990) (holding that best interests of the child test will be applied in determining good cause to transfer); In re Adoption of S.W., 41 P.3d 1003 , 1011–14 (Okla. | 2 | 2022–2022 |
In Re NV
green
2 sentences2022In In re N.V., 744 N.W.2d 634 , we answered the question. 2022In In re N.V., 744 N.W.2d 634 , we answered the question. | 2 | 2022–2022 |
Matter of Adoption of Riffle
green
2 sentences1997In re Riffle, 922 P.2d at 515 . 1997In re Riffle, 922 P.2d at 515 . | 2 | 1997–1997 |
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield
green
2 sentences1997According to In re S.E.G., eliminating the best interests standard on the question of good cause ensures "that Indian child welfare determinations are not based on a white, middle class standard which in many cases, forecloses placement with an Indian family." In re S.E.G., 521 N.W.2d at 359 (quoting Choctaw Indians, 490 U.S. at 37 , 109 S.Ct. at 1602 , 104 L.Ed.2d at 39 ). 1997According to In re S.E.G., eliminating the best interests standard on the question of good cause ensures "that Indian child welfare determinations are not based on a white, middle class standard which in many cases, forecloses placement with an Indian family." In re S.E.G., 521 N.W.2d at 359 (quoting Choctaw Indians, 490 U.S. at 37 , 109 S.Ct. at 1602 , 104 L.Ed.2d at 39 ). | 2 | 1997–1997 |
In Re the Custody of S.E.G.
green
2 sentences1997According to In re S.E.G., eliminating the best interests standard on the question of good cause ensures “that Indian child welfare determinations are not based on a white, middle class standard which in many cases, forecloses placement with an Indian family.” In re S.E.G., 521 N.W.2d at 359 (quoting Choctaw Indians, 490 U.S. at 37 , 109 S.Ct. at 1602 , 104 L.Ed.2d at 39 ). 1997According to In re S.E.G., eliminating the best interests standard on the question of good cause ensures "that Indian child welfare determinations are not based on a white, middle class standard which in many cases, forecloses placement with an Indian family." In re S.E.G., 521 N.W.2d at 359 (quoting Choctaw Indians, 490 U.S. at 37 , 109 S.Ct. at 1602 , 104 L.Ed.2d at 39 ). | 2 | 1997–1997 |
In Re the Marriage of Brainard
green
2 sentences1996Id. 1996Id. | 2 | 1996–1996 |
Fraser v. Jennison
green
2 sentences1942There is no question that the settled practice in this state has been to receive the testimony of the attending physician, touching' the testator’s physical and mental condition at and prior to the time of the execution of the will; and unless the reasons are obvious and urgent, and a proper construction of the statute requires it, no rule should be established which will set aside a practice long recognized as proper and necessary. * * '* The rule invoked by appellants is ‘one of privilege, for the protection of the patient and he may waive it if he sees fit; and what he may do in his lifetim 1894The rule invoked by appellants is “one of privilege, for the protection of the patient and he may waive it if he sees fit; and what he may do in his lifetime those who represent him after his death may do for the protection of the interests they claim under him.” Frazer v. Jennison, 42 Mich. 209 , 3 N. W. | 2 | 1894–1942 |
In Re P.L.
green
1 sentence2015Id. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Winters v. Winters
green
2 sentences1942Rep. 882 . * * * While the authorities are not in entire harmony, we think the better rule is that the prohibition of the statute may be waived either by the testator, or, after his death, by those who stand for him, and in this case by the executor. ’ ’ In Winters v. Winters, 102 Iowa 53, 57 , 71 N. W. 184, 185 , 63 Am. 1942Rep. 882 . * * * While the authorities are not in entire harmony, we think the better rule is that the prohibition of the statute may be waived either by the testator, or, after his death, by those who stand for him, and in this case by the executor. ’ ’ In Winters v. Winters, 102 Iowa 53, 57 , 71 N. W. 184, 185 , 63 Am. | 1 | 1942–1942 |
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.