Supreme Court of Vermont· 4/1/1994

In re D.M.

Citations

162 Vt. 33
641 A.2d 774
1994 Vt. LEXIS 45

How courts have described this case

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

stating that we review trial court decision on V.R.C.P. 60(b) for abuse of discretion
upholding denial of V.R.C.P. 60(b) motion based on allegation that child had been manipulated into fabricating stories of abuse
recognizing in case where placement goal was long-term foster care and eventual adoption, that child’s best interest required permanency and stability, and that this was possible only through severance of remaining legal bonds between child and her parents
rejecting mother’s argument that she should be given the chance to pursue reunification with the children until an alternative, permanent placement arose
stating stagnation may be found where parental “improvement is so insignificant that it is unlikely the parent will be able to resume parental duties in a reasonable time”
“Our law is clear . . . that a valid termination of parental rights does not depend on the availability of permanent foster care or adoption.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Allen, Dooley, Gibson, Johnson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named In re D.M.

115 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.