In re Amber B.

How courts have described this case

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

• respondent had no understanding of child's special needs.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In re Stanley D.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2000-12-26· cited 46×
• In re Jennifer W.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2003-03-11· cited 26×
• People v. Poindexter
  Colorado Court of Appeals· 2013-06-20· cited 13×
• Hunter Ridge, LLC v. Planning & Zoning Commission
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2015-09-01

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• In re Migdalia M.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1986-02-11· cited 332×
• In re Eden F.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1999-09-21· cited 208×
• In re Romance M.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1994-04-19· cited 113×
• In re Savanna M.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1999-11-23· cited 90×
• In re Christina V.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1995-06-20· cited 74×
• In re Eden F.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1998-04-07· cited 50×
• United Components, Inc. v. Wdowiak
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1996-11-19· cited 43×
• In re Romance M.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1993-04-06· cited 43×
• In re Sarah M.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1989-08-15· cited 30×
• In re Galen F.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1999-08-24· cited 28×
• In re Jessica S.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1999-02-02· cited 23×
• In re Marvin M.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 1998-05-05· cited 20×
• In re Jessica S.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1999-07-21· cited 15×