Farrco Construction Co. v. Goleman

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that, under a prior version of statutory scheme, the legislature did not “enact[] an evidentiary exclusion of communications between a child and a [court appointed special advocate]”
• no due process violation when excluded parent watched child’s testimony via closed-circuit television and was provided with a runner to take notes to the parent’s lawyer

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).