In Re Gazella

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the respondent lost her right to challenge the court’s exercise of jurisdiction because she failed to appeal the original order of disposition
• explaining that merely attending services “is not enough”; the parent must also benefit from services
• explaining that merely attending services “is not enough”; the parent must also benefit from services
• stating that the initial dispositional order contains a finding that the adjudication was held, that the children come within the jurisdiction in the court, and places the children out of the home, that order is appealable as of right
• the initial dispositional order contains a finding that the adjudication was held, that the children come within the jurisdiction in the court, and places the children out of the home
• “Matters affecting the court’s exercise of its jurisdiction may be challenged only on direct appeal of the jurisdictional decision, not by collateral attack in a subsequent appeal of an order terminating parental rights.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).