History:
L. 1982, ch. 182, § 38; Repealed, L. 2006, ch. 200, § 120; January 1, 2007.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Prior CINC adjudication might support a termination for unfitness but creates no presumption in a general CINC proceeding. In re J.D.C., 284 Kan. 155, 171, 159 P.3d 974 (2007).
2. Cited in upholding constitutionality of CINC; safeguards against arbitrary enforcement listed. In re A.F., 38 Kan. App. 2d 773, 778, 172 P.3d 66 (2007).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 2007–2007 · leading case: In the Interest of A.F., 172 P.3d 66 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007).
In the Interest of A.F., 172 P.3d 66 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007). “K.S.A. 38-1545 (replaced by K.S.A. 2006 Supp.”
In re Af, 172 P.3d 66 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007). “K.S.A. 38-1545 (replaced by K.S.A.2006 Supp.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.