In Re J'america B.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that an order is not final for claim preclusive purposes if “[t]he possibility still exists that the rights of a parent could be terminated in the future”
• holding that doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel did not apply because the trial court’s decision at the fitness hearing was not a final judgment on the merits
• noting that a decision is against the manifest weight of the evidence only if the opposite conclusion is clearly evident or the determination is unreasonable, arbitrary, or not based on the evidence presented
• noting that a decision is against the manifest weight of the evidence only if the opposite conclusion is clearly evident or the determination is unreasonable, arbitrary, or not based on the evidence presented
• recognizing relevance of fact that some of the conduct forming the basis of the unfitness finding occurred 8 years earlier, when the respondent was 10 years of age, though noting that this fact did not necessarily weigh in her favor
• recognizing relevance of fact that some of the conduct forming the basis of the unfitness finding occurred 8 years earlier, when the respondent was 10 years of age, though noting that this fact did not necessarily weigh in her favor

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).