Skip to main content

In re B.C.

Citations

  • 726 A.2d 45
  • 169 Vt. 1
  • 1999 Vt. LEXIS 1

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that “CHINS and TPR proceedings are subject to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA)”
  • recognizing that “CHINS and TPR proceedings are subject to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA)”
  • recognizing that “CHINS and TPR proceedings are subject to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA)”
  • recognizing that “CHINS and TPR proceedings are subject to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA)”
  • recognizing that the court “did not improperly shift the burden of proof. . . .[by] noting the absence of any credible evidence that grandmother could assume the role of parent”
  • noting that family court \possessed subject matter jurisdiction over the general type of controversy before it\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Amestoy, Dooley, Johnson, Morse, Skoglund

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.