Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 257. CHILDREN; CUSTODY, LEGITIMACY
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 257.071 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

[Repealed, 1999 c 139 art 4 s 3]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases, 1980–1999 · leading case: Matter of Welfare of Copus, 356 N.W.2d 363 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Matter of Welfare of Copus, 356 N.W.2d 363 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 18× “Appellant also claims the social service agency’s failure to provide him with a case plan as required by Minn.Stat. § 257.071, subd. 1 (1980) prevented the trial court from terminating his parental rights.”
In Re the Welfare of M.D.O., 462 N.W.2d 370 (Minn. 1990). · cites it 2× “” All subsequent case plans included this goal, which had to be completed before other goals, as the starting point for Janet Ostlund’s rehabilitation.”
In Re the Welfare of K.S., 427 N.W.2d 653 (Minn. 1988). · cites it 4× “outside the parental home pursuant to the requirements of Minn.Stat. § 257.071, subd. 4 (1986). 3 Hennepin County paid for K.”
In Re Scott Cnty. Master Docket, 672 F. Supp. 1152 (D. Minnesota 1987). · cites it 2× “The Minnesota Rules relied upon by plaintiffs are similarly unconnected to plaintiffs’ federal law claims, and plaintiffs appear to have waived these requirements in any event.”
In Re the Welfare of J.S., 470 N.W.2d 697 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 4× “In the court’s order of November 15, 1988, case plans were adopted as required by Minn.Stat. § 257.071 and included the actions to be taken by the parents to correct their parenting problems and the visitation requirements demanded of the parents.”
Matter of Welfare of Solomon, 291 N.W.2d 364 (Minn. 1980). · cites it 2× “In 1978, the Minnesota Legislature made extensive changes regarding the subject of children in foster care.”
In Re the Welfare of D.L., 486 N.W.2d 375 (Minn. 1992). · cites it 2× “02 (permanent care and custody); Minn.Stat. § 257.071, subds. 1 and la (foster placements); Minn.”
In re the Welfare of R. M. M., 316 N.W.2d 538 (Minn. 1982). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 257.071, subd. 1 (1980). The written plan is to describe specific actions which the parent can take to eliminate or correct the problems which led to the child’s placement.”
In Re Welfare of MH, 595 N.W.2d 223 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “191, including adoption of the case plan required by section 257.071; (ii) conditions leading to the determination will not be corrected within the reasonably foreseeable future.”
In Re the Welfare of A.R.G.-B., 551 N.W.2d 256 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 4× “See Minn.Stat. § 257.071, subd. 1 (1994) (“residential facility” includes “family foster home”).”
In Re the Welfare of A.H., 402 N.W.2d 598 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 257.071, subd. 1 (1986). In particular, case plans must explain the “nature of the effort to be made by the social service agency * * * to reunite the family.”
Matter of Welfare of DDK, 376 N.W.2d 717 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “See Minn. Stat. § 257.071 , subd. 1(6) (date on which child is expected to be returned to the home); see also R.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
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.