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.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 14 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 Matter of Chloe. P.-M. (Martinique P.).
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Matter of Chloe. P.-M. (Martinique P.) Anchor | green | “to establish neglect of a child, the petitioner must demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, (1) that the child's physical, mental, or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired, and (2) that the actual or threatened harm to the …” | 10 |
| 2 | Matter of Kamaya S. (Zephaniah S.) | green | “at a fact-finding hearing in a child protective proceeding pursuant to family court act article 10, the petitioner has the burden of establishing that the subject child has been abused or neglected by a preponderance of the evidence” | 4 |
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.