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.
4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 16 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from In re Todd D..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In re Todd D. Anchor | green | “where, as here, issues of credibility are presented, the hearing court's findings must be accorded great deference” | 7 |
| 2 | In re Alyshia M.R. | green | “the result reached herein would have been the same even had such statement been excluded” | 3 |
| 3 | In re Cherilyn P. | green | “no appeal lies from that part of an order entered upon the parties' consent” | 3 |
| 4 | In re Karm'ny QQ. | green | “the finding of neglect constitutes a permanent and significant stigma that might indirectly affect the mother's status in future proceedings” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.