Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090 (2026)

Grounds for involuntary termination of parental rights

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) The Circuit Court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child, if the Circuit Court finds from the record by clear and convincing evidence that: (a) 1. The child has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected child, as defined in KRS 600.020(1), by a court of competent jurisdiction; 2. The child is found to be an abused or neglected child, as defined in KRS 600.020(1), by the Circuit Court in this proceeding; 3. The child is found to have been diagnosed with neonatal abstinence syndrome at the time of birth, unless his or her birth mother: a. Was prescribed and properly using medication for a legitimate medical condition as directed by a health care practitioner that may have led to the neonatal abstinence syndrome; b. Is currently, or within ninety (90) days after the birth, enrolled in and maintaining substantial compliance with both a substance abuse treatment or recovery program and a regimen of prenatal care or postnatal care as recommended by her health care practitioner throughout the remaining term of her pregnancy or the appropriate time after her pregnancy; or c. In the absence of a prescription for the treatment of a legitimate medical condition, agrees, prior to discharge from the hospital, to participate in a court-ordered assessment by a drug treatment provider and the assigning of a certified peer support specialist for referral to appropriate treatment, and agrees to participate in treatment which shall commence within ninety (90) days after the birth; or 4. The parent has been convicted of a criminal charge relating to the physical or sexual abuse or neglect of any child and that physical or sexual abuse, neglect, or emotional injury to the child named in the present termination action is likely to occur if the parental rights are not terminated; (b) 1. The Cabinet for Health and Family Services has filed a petition with the court pursuant to KRS 620.180 or 625.050; or 2. A child-placing agency licensed by the cabinet, any county or Commonwealth's attorney, or a parent has filed a petition with the court under KRS 625.050; and (c) Termination would be in the best interest of the child. (2) No termination of parental rights shall be ordered unless the Circuit Court also finds by clear and convincing evidence the existence of one (1) or more of the following grounds: (a) That the parent has abandoned the child for a period of not less than ninety (90) days; (b) That the parent has inflicted or allowed to be inflicted upon the child, by other than accidental means, serious physical injury; (c) That the parent has continuously or repeatedly inflicted or allowed to be inflicted upon the child, by other than accidental means, physical injury or emotional harm; (d) That the parent has been convicted of a felony that involved the infliction of serious physical injury to any child; (e) That the parent, for a period of not less than six (6) months, has continuously or repeatedly failed or refused to provide or has been substantially incapable of providing essential parental care and protection for the child and that there is no reasonable expectation of improvement in parental care and protection, considering the age of the child; (f) That the parent has caused or allowed the child to be sexually abused or exploited; (g) That the parent, for reasons other than poverty alone, has continuously or repeatedly failed to provide or is incapable of providing essential food, clothing, shelter, medical care, or education reasonably necessary and available for the child's well-being and that there is no reasonable expectation of significant improvement in the parent's conduct in the immediately foreseeable future, considering the age of the child; (h) That: 1. The parent's parental rights to another child have been involuntarily terminated; 2. The child named in the present termination action was born subsequent to or during the pendency of the previous termination; and 3. The conditions or factors which were the basis for the previous termination finding have not been corrected; (i) That the parent has been convicted in a criminal proceeding of having caused or contributed to the death of another child as a result of physical or sexual abuse or neglect; (j) That the child has been in foster care under the responsibility of the cabinet for fifteen (15) cumulative months out of forty-eight (48) months preceding the filing of the petition to terminate parental rights; or (k) That the child has been removed from the biological or legal parents more than two (2) times in a twenty-four (24) month period by the cabinet or a court. (3) In determining the best interest of the child and the existence of a ground for termination, the Circuit Court shall consider the following factors: (a) Mental illness as defined by KRS 202A.011(9), or an intellectual disability as defined by KRS 202B.010(9) of the parent as certified by a qualified mental health professional, or a disability as defined in KRS 199.011, if the mental illness, intellectual disability, or disability renders the parent consistently unable to care for the immediate and ongoing physical or psychological needs of the child for extended periods of time; (b) Acts of abuse or neglect as defined in KRS 600.020(1) toward any child in the family; (c) If the child has been placed with the cabinet, whether the cabinet has, prior to the filing of the petition: 1. Made reasonable efforts as defined in KRS 620.020 to reunite the child with the parents unless one or more of the circumstances enumerated in KRS 610.127 for not requiring reasonable efforts have been substantiated in a written finding by the District Court; or 2. Provided a parent with a disability as defined in KRS 199.011 with targeted adaptive and supportive services based on an individual assessment of the parent, or has received a written acknowledgement from the parent knowingly and affirmatively rejecting the offered services; (d) The efforts and adjustments the parent has made in his or her circumstances, conduct, or conditions to make it in the child's best interest to return the child to his or her home within a reasonable period of time, considering the age of the child; (e) The physical, emotional, and mental health of the child and the prospects for the improvement of the child's welfare if termination is ordered; and (f) The payment or the failure to pay a reasonable portion of substitute physical care and maintenance if financially able to do so. (4) If the child has been placed with the cabinet, the parent may present testimony concerning the reunification, adaptive or supportive services offered by the cabinet, and whether additional services would be likely to bring about lasting parental adjustment enabling a return of the child to the parent. (5) If the parent proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the child will not continue to be an abused or neglected child as defined in KRS 600.020(1) if returned to the parent, or if the parent proves by a preponderance of the evidence that appropriate and specifically targeted adaptive or supportive services based upon an individual assessment of the parent have not been offered or provided to the parent, the court in its discretion may determine not to terminate parental rights. (6) Upon the conclusion of proof and argument of counsel, the Circuit Court shall enter findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a decision as to each parent-respondent within thirty (30) days either: (a) Terminating the right of the parent; or (b) Dismissing the petition and stating whether the child shall be returned to the parent or shall remain in the custody of the state. Effective: June 27, 2025 History: Amended 2025 Ky. Acts ch. 26, sec. 6, effective June 27, 2025. -- Amended 2022 Ky. Acts ch. 223, sec. 3, effective July 14, 2022; and ch. 230, sec. 15, effective July 14, 2022. -- Amended 2019 Ky. Acts ch. 132, sec. 6, effective June 27, 2019. -- Amended 2018 Ky. Acts ch. 159, sec. 26, effective July 14, 2018. -- Amended 2012 Ky. Acts ch. 146, sec. 141, effective July 12, 2012. -- Amended 2000 Ky. Acts ch. 60, sec. 6, effective July 14, 2000. -- Amended 1998 Ky. Acts ch. 57, sec. 16, effective March 17, 1998. -- Amended 1994 Ky. Acts ch. 242, sec. 17, effective July 15, 1994. -- Amended 1988 Ky. Acts ch. 350, sec. 75, effective April 10, 1988. -- Created 1986 Ky. Acts ch. 423, sec. 105, effective July 1, 1987.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 155 cases (82 in the last 5 years), 1989–2026 · leading case: D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012).
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). · cites it 93× “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204 (Ky. 2014). · cites it 17× “090 provides for a tripartite test which allows for parental rights to be involuntarily terminated only upon a finding, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the following three prongs are satisfied: (1) the child is found or has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected…”
Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. T.N.H., 302 S.W.3d 658 (Ky. 2010). · cites it 19× “The grounds for involuntary termination of parental rights in KRS 625.090 relevant to the case at hand provide as follows: (1) The Circuit Court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child, if the Circuit Court finds from the pleadings and by…”
K.M.E. v. Commonwealth, 565 S.W.3d 648 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 13× “Unless a parent stands convicted of a criminal charge stemming from abuse or neglect of a child-which does not describe this case-TPR is prohibited absent the trial court finding a court of competent jurisdiction has previously adjudged the child to be abused or neglected, or…”
A.F. v. L.B., 572 S.W.3d 64 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 13× “502 is its express requirement in KRS 625.090. See P.C.C. v. C.M.C., Jr. , 297 S.”
M.E.C. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 254 S.W.3d 846 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 10× “*854 As has been stated above, KRS 625.090 provides that the circuit court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child if it finds from the pleadings and by clear and convincing evidence that the child has been adjudged to be an abused or…”
M.A.B. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 456 S.W.3d 407 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 20× “2006) (citing to KRS 625.090; Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S.”
K.M.J. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 503 S.W.3d 193 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 9× “Ultimately, we must agree with Mother that the procedural constraints of KRS 625.090 take precedence over the trial court’s chosen method of extending the case beyond the initial termination trial.”
Wa v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Serv. Commonwealth, 275 S.W.3d 214 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 8× “020(1); that the criteria set forth in KRS 625.090 was met and it would be in the best interest of the child to terminate the parental rights of his parents; that for at least six months, the parents “continuously failed to provide or [had] been substantially incapable of…”
F.V. v. Commonwealth, 567 S.W.3d 597 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 9× “090 provides for a tripartite test which allows for parental rights to be involuntarily terminated only upon a finding, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the following three prongs are satisfied: (1) the child is found or has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected…”
Commonwealth, Cabinet for Families & Child. Ex Rel. T.L.M. v. G.C.W., 139 S.W.3d 172 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 8× “KRS 625.090(1). After that threshold is met, *176 the court must find the existence of one of the numerous grounds recited in KRS 625.”
Prater v. Cabinet for Human Resources, 954 S.W.2d 954 (Ky. 1997). · cites it 6× “It is beyond question that CHR established by clear and convincing evidence that the children were abandoned, neglected and abused pursuant to KRS 625.090(1). The Cabinet also demonstrated that Prater failed to cooperate concerning treatment and rehabilitation.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(1) — 37 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
M.A.B. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 456 S.W.3d 407 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). “2006) (citing to KRS 625.090; Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S.”
Prater v. Cabinet for Human Resources, 954 S.W.2d 954 (Ky. 1997). “It is beyond question that CHR established by clear and convincing evidence that the children were abandoned, neglected and abused pursuant to KRS 625.090(1). The Cabinet also demonstrated that Prater failed to cooperate concerning treatment and rehabilitation.”
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204 (Ky. 2014). “090 provides for a tripartite test which allows for parental rights to be involuntarily terminated only upon a finding, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the following three prongs are satisfied: (1) the child is found or has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected…”
Commonwealth, Cabinet for Families & Child. Ex Rel. T.L.M. v. G.C.W., 139 S.W.3d 172 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004). “KRS 625.090(1). After that threshold is met, *176 the court must find the existence of one of the numerous grounds recited in KRS 625.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(1)(a) — 42 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
C.J. v. M.S., 572 S.W.3d 492 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).
K.M.E. v. Commonwealth, 565 S.W.3d 648 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018). “Unless a parent stands convicted of a criminal charge stemming from abuse or neglect of a child-which does not describe this case-TPR is prohibited absent the trial court finding a court of competent jurisdiction has previously adjudged the child to be abused or neglected, or…”
John Thrasher v. Jeremy Criswell (Ky. Ct. App. 2024).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(1)(a)(1) — 1 case
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(1)(b) — 16 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(1)(c) — 33 cases
K.M.E. v. Commonwealth, 565 S.W.3d 648 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018). “Unless a parent stands convicted of a criminal charge stemming from abuse or neglect of a child-which does not describe this case-TPR is prohibited absent the trial court finding a court of competent jurisdiction has previously adjudged the child to be abused or neglected, or…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(1)(d) — 1 case
John Thrasher v. Jeremy Criswell (Ky. Ct. App. 2024).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(1)(e) — 1 case
R.H. v. C.G. (Ky. Ct. App. 2024).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(1)(g) — 1 case
R.H. v. C.G. (Ky. Ct. App. 2024).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2) — 87 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
K.M.E. v. Commonwealth, 565 S.W.3d 648 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018). “Unless a parent stands convicted of a criminal charge stemming from abuse or neglect of a child-which does not describe this case-TPR is prohibited absent the trial court finding a court of competent jurisdiction has previously adjudged the child to be abused or neglected, or…”
M.A.B. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 456 S.W.3d 407 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). “2006) (citing to KRS 625.090; Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S.”
Wa v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Serv. Commonwealth, 275 S.W.3d 214 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009). “020(1); that the criteria set forth in KRS 625.090 was met and it would be in the best interest of the child to terminate the parental rights of his parents; that for at least six months, the parents “continuously failed to provide or [had] been substantially incapable of…”
M.E.C. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 254 S.W.3d 846 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008). “*854 As has been stated above, KRS 625.090 provides that the circuit court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child if it finds from the pleadings and by clear and convincing evidence that the child has been adjudged to be an abused or…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2)(a) — 51 cases
Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. T.N.H., 302 S.W.3d 658 (Ky. 2010). “The grounds for involuntary termination of parental rights in KRS 625.090 relevant to the case at hand provide as follows: (1) The Circuit Court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child, if the Circuit Court finds from the pleadings and by…”
K.M.E. v. Commonwealth, 565 S.W.3d 648 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018). “Unless a parent stands convicted of a criminal charge stemming from abuse or neglect of a child-which does not describe this case-TPR is prohibited absent the trial court finding a court of competent jurisdiction has previously adjudged the child to be abused or neglected, or…”
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204 (Ky. 2014). “090 provides for a tripartite test which allows for parental rights to be involuntarily terminated only upon a finding, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the following three prongs are satisfied: (1) the child is found or has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected…”
C.J. v. M.S., 572 S.W.3d 492 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019).
A.F. v. L.B., 572 S.W.3d 64 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019). “502 is its express requirement in KRS 625.090. See P.C.C. v. C.M.C., Jr. , 297 S.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2)(b) — 4 cases
M.E.C. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 254 S.W.3d 846 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008). “*854 As has been stated above, KRS 625.090 provides that the circuit court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child if it finds from the pleadings and by clear and convincing evidence that the child has been adjudged to be an abused or…”
Cabinet for Human Resources v. Rogeski, 909 S.W.2d 660 (Ky. 1995).
C.H. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 399 S.W.3d 782 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).
M.S.S. v. J.E.B. (Ky. 2022).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2)(c) — 6 cases
Prater v. Cabinet for Human Resources, 954 S.W.2d 954 (Ky. 1997). “It is beyond question that CHR established by clear and convincing evidence that the children were abandoned, neglected and abused pursuant to KRS 625.090(1). The Cabinet also demonstrated that Prater failed to cooperate concerning treatment and rehabilitation.”
J.M.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 239 S.W.3d 116 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).
B.E.K. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 487 S.W.3d 457 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2)(d) — 1 case
W.K.G. v. A.P.W. (Ky. Ct. App. 2026).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2)(e) — 43 cases
Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. T.N.H., 302 S.W.3d 658 (Ky. 2010). “The grounds for involuntary termination of parental rights in KRS 625.090 relevant to the case at hand provide as follows: (1) The Circuit Court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child, if the Circuit Court finds from the pleadings and by…”
M.E.C. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 254 S.W.3d 846 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008). “*854 As has been stated above, KRS 625.090 provides that the circuit court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child if it finds from the pleadings and by clear and convincing evidence that the child has been adjudged to be an abused or…”
K.M.E. v. Commonwealth, 565 S.W.3d 648 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018). “Unless a parent stands convicted of a criminal charge stemming from abuse or neglect of a child-which does not describe this case-TPR is prohibited absent the trial court finding a court of competent jurisdiction has previously adjudged the child to be abused or neglected, or…”
F.V. v. Commonwealth, 567 S.W.3d 597 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018). “090 provides for a tripartite test which allows for parental rights to be involuntarily terminated only upon a finding, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the following three prongs are satisfied: (1) the child is found or has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected…”
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. A.G.G., 190 S.W.3d 338 (Ky. 2006).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2)(f) — 1 case
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. A.G.G., 190 S.W.3d 338 (Ky. 2006).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2)(g) — 26 cases
Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. T.N.H., 302 S.W.3d 658 (Ky. 2010). “The grounds for involuntary termination of parental rights in KRS 625.090 relevant to the case at hand provide as follows: (1) The Circuit Court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child, if the Circuit Court finds from the pleadings and by…”
K.M.E. v. Commonwealth, 565 S.W.3d 648 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018). “Unless a parent stands convicted of a criminal charge stemming from abuse or neglect of a child-which does not describe this case-TPR is prohibited absent the trial court finding a court of competent jurisdiction has previously adjudged the child to be abused or neglected, or…”
J.M.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 239 S.W.3d 116 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).
V.S. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 194 S.W.3d 331 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).
W.L.C. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 484 S.W.3d 737 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2)(h)(2) — 1 case
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2)(h)(3) — 1 case
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2)(h)(l) — 2 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
D.L.B. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 418 S.W.3d 426 (Ky. Ct. App. 2014).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(2)(j) — 28 cases
Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. T.N.H., 302 S.W.3d 658 (Ky. 2010). “The grounds for involuntary termination of parental rights in KRS 625.090 relevant to the case at hand provide as follows: (1) The Circuit Court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child, if the Circuit Court finds from the pleadings and by…”
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
Cabinet for Health & Fam. v. J.M.G., 475 S.W.3d 600 (Ky. 2015).
R v. v. Commonwealth, Dep't for Health & Fam. Servs., 242 S.W.3d 669 (Ky. Ct. App. 2007).
W.L.C. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 484 S.W.3d 737 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(3) — 59 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
M.A.B. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 456 S.W.3d 407 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). “2006) (citing to KRS 625.090; Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S.”
Commonwealth, Cabinet for Families & Child. Ex Rel. T.L.M. v. G.C.W., 139 S.W.3d 172 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004). “KRS 625.090(1). After that threshold is met, *176 the court must find the existence of one of the numerous grounds recited in KRS 625.”
C.J.M. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 389 S.W.3d 155 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).
C.R.G. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 297 S.W.3d 914 (Ky. Ct. App. 2009).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(3)(a) — 20 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204 (Ky. 2014). “090 provides for a tripartite test which allows for parental rights to be involuntarily terminated only upon a finding, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the following three prongs are satisfied: (1) the child is found or has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected…”
J.L.C. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 539 S.W.3d 692 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).
C.A.W. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 391 S.W.3d 400 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).
M.P.R. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 520 S.W.3d 409 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(3)(b) — 11 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
C.M.C. v. A.L.W., 180 S.W.3d 485 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).
J.L.C. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 539 S.W.3d 692 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).
C.H. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 399 S.W.3d 782 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).
Cmc v. Alw, 180 S.W.3d 485 (Ky. Ct. App. 2005).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(3)(c) — 30 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204 (Ky. 2014). “090 provides for a tripartite test which allows for parental rights to be involuntarily terminated only upon a finding, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the following three prongs are satisfied: (1) the child is found or has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected…”
M.E.C. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 254 S.W.3d 846 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008). “*854 As has been stated above, KRS 625.090 provides that the circuit court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child if it finds from the pleadings and by clear and convincing evidence that the child has been adjudged to be an abused or…”
M.A.B. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 456 S.W.3d 407 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). “2006) (citing to KRS 625.090; Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S.”
C.J.M. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 389 S.W.3d 155 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(3)(d) — 23 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204 (Ky. 2014). “090 provides for a tripartite test which allows for parental rights to be involuntarily terminated only upon a finding, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the following three prongs are satisfied: (1) the child is found or has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected…”
C.H. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 399 S.W.3d 782 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(3)(e) — 19 cases
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204 (Ky. 2014). “090 provides for a tripartite test which allows for parental rights to be involuntarily terminated only upon a finding, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the following three prongs are satisfied: (1) the child is found or has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected…”
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
M.E.C. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 254 S.W.3d 846 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008). “*854 As has been stated above, KRS 625.090 provides that the circuit court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child if it finds from the pleadings and by clear and convincing evidence that the child has been adjudged to be an abused or…”
Commonwealth, Cabinet for Families & Child. Ex Rel. T.L.M. v. G.C.W., 139 S.W.3d 172 (Ky. Ct. App. 2004). “KRS 625.090(1). After that threshold is met, *176 the court must find the existence of one of the numerous grounds recited in KRS 625.”
J.L.C. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 539 S.W.3d 692 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(3)(f) — 9 cases
C.H. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 399 S.W.3d 782 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(4) — 7 cases
Cabinet for Human Resources v. J.B.B., 772 S.W.2d 646 (Ky. Ct. App. 1989).
C.H. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 399 S.W.3d 782 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(5) — 12 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
C.A.W. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 391 S.W.3d 400 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. I.W., 338 S.W.3d 295 (Ky. Ct. App. 2010).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(6) — 12 cases
A.F. v. L.B., 572 S.W.3d 64 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019). “502 is its express requirement in KRS 625.090. See P.C.C. v. C.M.C., Jr. , 297 S.”
K.M.J. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 503 S.W.3d 193 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016). “Ultimately, we must agree with Mother that the procedural constraints of KRS 625.090 take precedence over the trial court’s chosen method of extending the case beyond the initial termination trial.”
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204 (Ky. 2014). “090 provides for a tripartite test which allows for parental rights to be involuntarily terminated only upon a finding, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the following three prongs are satisfied: (1) the child is found or has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected…”
Com. v. LJP, 316 S.W.3d 871 (Ky. 2010).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(6)(a) — 2 cases
Com. v. LJP, 316 S.W.3d 871 (Ky. 2010).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(6)(b) — 2 cases
Com. v. LJP, 316 S.W.3d 871 (Ky. 2010).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(8) — 1 case
A.D.B. v. Commonwealth, 205 S.W.3d 255 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(S)(e) — 1 case
S.L.C.E. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 454 S.W.3d 305 (Ky. Ct. App. 2014).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(a) — 4 cases
Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. K.H., 423 S.W.3d 204 (Ky. 2014). “090 provides for a tripartite test which allows for parental rights to be involuntarily terminated only upon a finding, based on clear and convincing evidence, that the following three prongs are satisfied: (1) the child is found or has been adjudged to be an abused or neglected…”
B.E.K. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 487 S.W.3d 457 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016).
H.M.R. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 521 S.W.3d 221 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(a)(1) — 1 case
M.A.B. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 456 S.W.3d 407 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). “2006) (citing to KRS 625.090; Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(a)(l) — 1 case
B.E.K. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 487 S.W.3d 457 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(c) — 2 cases
M.S.S. v. J.E.B. (Ky. 2022).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(e) — 5 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(l)(a) — 11 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. T.N.H., 302 S.W.3d 658 (Ky. 2010). “The grounds for involuntary termination of parental rights in KRS 625.090 relevant to the case at hand provide as follows: (1) The Circuit Court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child, if the Circuit Court finds from the pleadings and by…”
M.A.B. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 456 S.W.3d 407 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). “2006) (citing to KRS 625.090; Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S.”
R. C. R. v. Commonwealth Cabinet for Human Resources, 988 S.W.2d 36 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999).
C.J.M. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 389 S.W.3d 155 (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(l)(a)(2) — 2 cases
Leach v. Harrison, 337 S.W.3d 646 (Ky. Ct. App. 2011).
S.L.C.E. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 454 S.W.3d 305 (Ky. Ct. App. 2014).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(l)(a)(3) — 2 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
W.L.C. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 484 S.W.3d 737 (Ky. Ct. App. 2016).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(l)(a)(l) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(l)(b) — 6 cases
D.G.R. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 364 S.W.3d 106 (Ky. 2012). “The termination statute, KRS 625.090, establishes different standards of proof for the Cabinet and the parents whose rights are to be terminated when the court considers the best interest of a child.”
Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs. v. T.N.H., 302 S.W.3d 658 (Ky. 2010). “The grounds for involuntary termination of parental rights in KRS 625.090 relevant to the case at hand provide as follows: (1) The Circuit Court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child, if the Circuit Court finds from the pleadings and by…”
C.A.W. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 391 S.W.3d 400 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).
A.D.B. v. Commonwealth, 205 S.W.3d 255 (Ky. Ct. App. 2006).
C.H. v. Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 399 S.W.3d 782 (Ky. Ct. App. 2013).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(l)(c) — 2 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(l)(d) — 3 cases
M.E.C. v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health & Fam. Servs., 254 S.W.3d 846 (Ky. Ct. App. 2008). “*854 As has been stated above, KRS 625.090 provides that the circuit court may involuntarily terminate all parental rights of a parent of a named child if it finds from the pleadings and by clear and convincing evidence that the child has been adjudged to be an abused or…”
Forester v. Forester, 979 S.W.2d 928 (Ky. Ct. App. 1998).
Crum v. Commonwealth, Cabinet for Human Resources, 928 S.W.2d 355 (Ky. Ct. App. 1996).
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.