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.
6 Michigan opinions name it 1 courts 2000–2024 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan 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 Terrygreen2 sentences2024In that ruling, this Court stated that, “[a]ny claim that the parent’s rights under the ADA were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate her parental rights, and the failure to timely raise the issue constitutes a waiver.” Id. 2020In addition, “[a]ny claim that the parent’s rights under the -2- ADA were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate her parental rights, and the failure to timely raise the issue constitutes a waiver.” In re Terry, 240 Mich App 14 , 26 n 5; 610 NW2d 563 (2000). | 1 | 5 |
In Re Terrygreen2 sentences2020In addition, “[a]ny claim that the parent’s rights under the -2- ADA were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate her parental rights, and the failure to timely raise the issue constitutes a waiver.” In re Terry, 240 Mich App 14 , 26 n 5; 610 NW2d 563 (2000). 2016But parents must object to services offered “when the [trial] court adopts a service plan.” In re Terry, 240 Mich App 14, 27 ; 610 NW2d 563 (2000). “[F]ailure to timely raise the issue constitutes a waiver.” Id. at 26 n 5. | 1 | 3 |
In Re Hubelgreen2 sentences2000Plaintiff’s conduct here is more appropriately characterized as a forfeiture. 6 See also In re Terry, 240 Mich App 14, 26, n 5 ; 610 NW2d 563 (2000) (“[a]ny claim that the parent’s rights under the ada were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate her parental rights, and the failure to timely raise the issue constitutes a waiver”); In re Hubel, 148 Mich App 696, 699 ; 384 NW2d 849 (1986) (“[i]n civil cases, the right to a jury trial is waived by a party’s failure timely to demand a jury as prescribed by law”); Thomas v Diamond, 131 Mich App 10 2000Plaintiff’s conduct here is more appropriately characterized as a forfeiture. 6 See also In re Terry, 240 Mich App 14, 26, n 5 ; 610 NW2d 563 (2000) (“[a]ny claim that the parent’s rights under the ada were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate her parental rights, and the failure to timely raise the issue constitutes a waiver”); In re Hubel, 148 Mich App 696, 699 ; 384 NW2d 849 (1986) (“[i]n civil cases, the right to a jury trial is waived by a party’s failure timely to demand a jury as prescribed by law”); Thomas v Diamond, 131 Mich App 10 | 1 | 1 |
In the Interest of C.M.green1 sentence2000See, e.g., JT v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Services, 329 Ark. 243, 254-258 , 947 S.W.2d 761 (1997); In re C.M., 526 N.W.2d 562, 566 (1994); In re Angel B, 659 A.2d 277, 279 (Me., 1995); In re Welfare of AJR, 78 Wash.App. 222, 229-230 , 896 P.2d 1298 (1995). [4] Services are not mandated in all situations, but M.C.L. § 712A.18f(1)(b); MSA 27.3178(598.18f)(1)(b) requires petitioner to justify a decision not to provide services to a particular family. [5] Any claim that the parent's rights under the ADA were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate | 1 | 1 |
J.T. v. Arkansas Department of Human Servicesgreen2 sentences2000See, e.g., JT v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Services, 329 Ark. 243, 254-258 , 947 S.W.2d 761 (1997); In re C.M., 526 N.W.2d 562, 566 (1994); In re Angel B, 659 A.2d 277, 279 (Me., 1995); In re Welfare of AJR, 78 Wash.App. 222, 229-230 , 896 P.2d 1298 (1995). [4] Services are not mandated in all situations, but M.C.L. § 712A.18f(1)(b); MSA 27.3178(598.18f)(1)(b) requires petitioner to justify a decision not to provide services to a particular family. [5] Any claim that the parent's rights under the ADA were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate 2000See, e.g., JT v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Services, 329 Ark. 243, 254-258 , 947 S.W.2d 761 (1997); In re C.M., 526 N.W.2d 562, 566 (1994); In re Angel B, 659 A.2d 277, 279 (Me., 1995); In re Welfare of AJR, 78 Wash.App. 222, 229-230 , 896 P.2d 1298 (1995). [4] Services are not mandated in all situations, but M.C.L. § 712A.18f(1)(b); MSA 27.3178(598.18f)(1)(b) requires petitioner to justify a decision not to provide services to a particular family. [5] Any claim that the parent's rights under the ADA were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate | 1 | 1 |
In Re Angel B.green1 sentence2000See, e.g., JT v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Services, 329 Ark. 243, 254-258 , 947 S.W.2d 761 (1997); In re C.M., 526 N.W.2d 562, 566 (1994); In re Angel B, 659 A.2d 277, 279 (Me., 1995); In re Welfare of AJR, 78 Wash.App. 222, 229-230 , 896 P.2d 1298 (1995). [4] Services are not mandated in all situations, but M.C.L. § 712A.18f(1)(b); MSA 27.3178(598.18f)(1)(b) requires petitioner to justify a decision not to provide services to a particular family. [5] Any claim that the parent's rights under the ADA were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Robinson v. Department of Social & Health Services
green
2 sentences2000See, e.g., JT v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Services, 329 Ark. 243, 254-258 , 947 S.W.2d 761 (1997); In re C.M., 526 N.W.2d 562, 566 (1994); In re Angel B, 659 A.2d 277, 279 (Me., 1995); In re Welfare of AJR, 78 Wash.App. 222, 229-230 , 896 P.2d 1298 (1995). [4] Services are not mandated in all situations, but M.C.L. § 712A.18f(1)(b); MSA 27.3178(598.18f)(1)(b) requires petitioner to justify a decision not to provide services to a particular family. [5] Any claim that the parent's rights under the ADA were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate 2000See, e.g., JT v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Services, 329 Ark. 243, 254-258 , 947 S.W.2d 761 (1997); In re C.M., 526 N.W.2d 562, 566 (1994); In re Angel B, 659 A.2d 277, 279 (Me., 1995); In re Welfare of AJR, 78 Wash.App. 222, 229-230 , 896 P.2d 1298 (1995). [4] Services are not mandated in all situations, but M.C.L. § 712A.18f(1)(b); MSA 27.3178(598.18f)(1)(b) requires petitioner to justify a decision not to provide services to a particular family. [5] Any claim that the parent's rights under the ADA were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Thoms v. Diamond
green
2 sentences2000Plaintiff’s conduct here is more appropriately characterized as a forfeiture. 6 See also In re Terry, 240 Mich App 14, 26, n 5 ; 610 NW2d 563 (2000) (“[a]ny claim that the parent’s rights under the ada were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate her parental rights, and the failure to timely raise the issue constitutes a waiver”); In re Hubel, 148 Mich App 696, 699 ; 384 NW2d 849 (1986) (“[i]n civil cases, the right to a jury trial is waived by a party’s failure timely to demand a jury as prescribed by law”); Thomas v Diamond, 131 Mich App 10 2000Plaintiff’s conduct here is more appropriately characterized as a forfeiture. 6 See also In re Terry, 240 Mich App 14, 26, n 5 ; 610 NW2d 563 (2000) (“[a]ny claim that the parent’s rights under the ada were violated must be raised well before a dispositional hearing regarding whether to terminate her parental rights, and the failure to timely raise the issue constitutes a waiver”); In re Hubel, 148 Mich App 696, 699 ; 384 NW2d 849 (1986) (“[i]n civil cases, the right to a jury trial is waived by a party’s failure timely to demand a jury as prescribed by law”); Thomas v Diamond, 131 Mich App 10 | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.