Sorge v. State, 762 A.2d 816 (Vt. 2000). · cites it 3דThe only specific statutory duty of care SRS owed was to Grant, a minor in its custody, as 33 V.S.A. § 5501 “sets forth mandatory acts for the protection of a particular class of persons” to which Grant belonged.”
State v. Dixon, 2008 VT 112 (Vt. 2008). · cites it 3דThus, before we consider in sequence the details of the trial court’s decision and the specific factors it balanced, we must note preliminarily that our review of the court’s decision is not based solely on a mathematical computation of factors; to do so would suggest…”
In re J.F., 2006 VT 45 (Vt. 2006). · cites it 2דThe party seeking modification of a prior court-approved goal bears the burden of demonstrating that there are material and changed circumstances, and that the best interests of the children, considering the criteria set forth in 33 V.”
In re A.G., 2004 VT 125 (Vt. 2004). · cites it 2דwith permanency cannot be achieved with long-term foster care. Father claims the court erred by terminating his rights, considering that he had always acted properly toward A.”
In re B.S., 693 A.2d 716 (Vt. 1997). “1086 (1990); see also 33 V.S.A. § 5501. The juvenile court is one of limited jurisdiction, and its jurisdictional grant must be *353 strictly construed.”
Dalmer v. State, 811 A.2d 1214 (Vt. 2002). “See 33 V.S.A. § 5501(a); In re R.B., 152 Vt. 415, 420 , 566 A.”
In re C.L., 2005 VT 34 (Vt. 2005). “”); 33 V.S.A. § 5501(a)(3) (purpose of child protection law is to be achieved “whenever possible, in a family environment, separating the child from his parents only when necessary for his welfare or in the interests of public safety”).”
In re J.H., 587 A.2d 1009 (Vt. 1991). “See 33 V.S.A. § 5501(a)(3). Before the court may order a modification of the existing disposition order, however, it must find that there has been a substantial change in material circumstances warranting such a modification.”
In re W.L., 2009 VT 41 (Vt. 2009). “” 33 V.S.A. § 5501(a)(4). In this case, the need for stability and permanence was particularly pronounced given W.”
In Re Inquest Proceedings, 676 A.2d 790 (Vt. 1996). “§ 631(a)(3)) (current version at 33 VS.A. § 5501(a)(3)) (emphasis added). Similarly, in Meyer , the United States Supreme Court recognized that the rights “to marry, establish a home and bring up children” are among “those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to…”
In re F.P., 665 A.2d 597 (Vt. 1995). “Also relevant to father’s claim here are the purposes served by a CHINS proceeding. One stated purpose of chapter 55 of Title 33 is “to provide for the care, protection and wholesome moral, mental and physical development of children.”
In re J.D., 685 A.2d 1095 (Vt. 1996). “The mother first argues that the court violated 33 V.S.A. § 5501(a) when it “effectively terminated” her parental rights by granting custody of J.”
Dalmer v. State, 811 A.2d 1214 (Vt. 2002). “See 33 V.S.A. § 5501(a); In re R.B., 152 Vt. 415, 420 , 566 A.”
In re J.D., 685 A.2d 1095 (Vt. 1996). “The mother first argues that the court violated 33 V.S.A. § 5501(a) when it “effectively terminated” her parental rights by granting custody of J.”
In re J.F., 2006 VT 45 (Vt. 2006). “The party seeking modification of a prior court-approved goal bears the burden of demonstrating that there are material and changed circumstances, and that the best interests of the children, considering the criteria set forth in 33 V.”
In re A.G., 2004 VT 125 (Vt. 2004). “with permanency cannot be achieved with long-term foster care. Father claims the court erred by terminating his rights, considering that he had always acted properly toward A.”
In re F.P., 665 A.2d 597 (Vt. 1995). “Also relevant to father’s claim here are the purposes served by a CHINS proceeding. One stated purpose of chapter 55 of Title 33 is “to provide for the care, protection and wholesome moral, mental and physical development of children.”
Sorge v. State, 762 A.2d 816 (Vt. 2000). “The only specific statutory duty of care SRS owed was to Grant, a minor in its custody, as 33 V.S.A. § 5501 “sets forth mandatory acts for the protection of a particular class of persons” to which Grant belonged.”
In re J.F., 2006 VT 45 (Vt. 2006). “The party seeking modification of a prior court-approved goal bears the burden of demonstrating that there are material and changed circumstances, and that the best interests of the children, considering the criteria set forth in 33 V.”
In re A.G., 2004 VT 125 (Vt. 2004). “with permanency cannot be achieved with long-term foster care. Father claims the court erred by terminating his rights, considering that he had always acted properly toward A.”
In re C.L., 2005 VT 34 (Vt. 2005). “”); 33 V.S.A. § 5501(a)(3) (purpose of child protection law is to be achieved “whenever possible, in a family environment, separating the child from his parents only when necessary for his welfare or in the interests of public safety”).”
In re J.H., 587 A.2d 1009 (Vt. 1991). “See 33 V.S.A. § 5501(a)(3). Before the court may order a modification of the existing disposition order, however, it must find that there has been a substantial change in material circumstances warranting such a modification.”
In Re Inquest Proceedings, 676 A.2d 790 (Vt. 1996). “§ 631(a)(3)) (current version at 33 VS.A. § 5501(a)(3)) (emphasis added). Similarly, in Meyer , the United States Supreme Court recognized that the rights “to marry, establish a home and bring up children” are among “those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to…”
— Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 33, § 5501(a)(4) — 1 case
In re W.L., 2009 VT 41 (Vt. 2009). “” 33 V.S.A. § 5501(a)(4). In this case, the need for stability and permanence was particularly pronounced given W.”
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.