In re A.W.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that legislative history of termination statute indicated intent to minimize time children spent in foster care in view of concern that a large number of children in foster care were left “adrift in the ‘system’ ” for years
• \The overarching goal of [this provision] was to create as hospitable an environment as possible for potential adoptive parents of neglected children\
• “The overarching goal of [this provision] was to create as hospitable an environment as possible for potential adoptive parents of neglected children”
• two-fold motivation for statutory change: to hold social services agencies accountable for children adjudicated neglected, and to authorize termination of parental rights in unusual circumstances in a neglect proceeding
• two-fold motivation for statutory change: to hold social services agencies accountable for children adjudicated neglected, and to authorize termination of parental rights in unusual circumstances in a neglect proceeding
• trial judge may, in his or her discretion, inquire about “the practical plans and realistic expectations for adoptive placement of a particular child”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Appeal of H.R.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1990-08-29· cited 85×
• In re D.R.M.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1990-02-28· cited 63×
• In re L.W.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1992-08-04· cited 60×
• S.S. v. D.M.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1991-09-30· cited 53×
• In re A.R.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1996-06-20· cited 42×
• In re D.G.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1990-12-03· cited 28×
• In re J.G.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2003-09-18· cited 27×
• Matter of Baby Girl DS
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1991-11-27· cited 24×
• In re C.T.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1999-02-11· cited 23×
• In Re Tw. P.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2000-07-27· cited 10×
• In re L.H.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1993-12-20· cited 9×
• In Re Ja. J.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 2002-12-31· cited 7×
• In re P.D.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1995-08-24· cited 7×
• E.C. v. District of Columbia
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1991-04-12· cited 5×
• In Re AW
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1990-01-24· cited 1×
• In Re DRM
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1990-02-28
• Ss v. Dm
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1991-09-30
• In Re CT
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1999-02-11
• Matter of PD
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1995-08-24
• In Re AR
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1996-06-20

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. of Durham Cty.
  Supreme Court· 1981-08-28· cited 3,458×
• In re A.B.E.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1989-09-29· cited 53×
• In re C. A. P.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1976-04-13· cited 29×
• Appeal of U.S.W.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1988-05-11· cited 24×
• In re H. M.
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1978-05-19· cited 7×