Elkins v. Marion County Office of Family & Children

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that provision of services is not requisite element of Indiana’s termination statute and even complete failure to provide reunification services does not serve to negate necessary element of termination statute
• recognizing that provision of services is not a requisite element of the termination statute and a failure to provide services does not serve as a basis on which to directly attack a termination order as contrary to law
• concluding that the “provision of family services is not a requisite element of our parental rights termination statute” and “even a complete failure to provide services would not serve to negate a necessary element of the termination statute and require reversal”
• noting that mother had historically been unable or unwilling to fully cooperate in the CHINS proceedings
• “even a complete failure to provide services would not serve to negate a necessary element of the termination statute and require reversal.”
• “even a complete failure to provide services would not serve to negate a necessary element of the termination statute and require reversal.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).