In re M.D.
Citations
- 2019 Ohio 3674
Syllabus
Juvenile court's conclusion, pursuant to R.C. 2151.414(D), that permanent court commitment for purposes of adoption was in the best interest of appellant's two minor children was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Even if appellant could establish standing to challenge the juvenile court's denial of maternal aunt's motion to intervene in the child custody case, juvenile court did not abuse its discretion by denying intervention. Judgment affirmed.
Judges: Sadler
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
5 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Blakemore v. BlakemoreOhio Supreme Court· 1983-07-06· cited 14,330×
- Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court· 2000-06-05· cited 6,943×
- In re MurrayOhio Supreme Court· 1990-07-03· cited 1,148×
- In re CunninghamOhio Supreme Court· 1979-07-18· cited 599×
- In re C.F.Ohio Supreme Court· 2007-03-28· cited 583×
- In re K.H.Ohio Supreme Court· 2008-09-30· cited 255×
- Ohio Pyro, Inc. v. Ohio Department of CommerceOhio Supreme Court· 2007-10-03· cited 197×
- Moore v. City of MiddletownOhio Supreme Court· 2012-08-30· cited 193×
- In re K.M.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2015-11-12· cited 72×
- In re L.W.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2017-02-23· cited 61×
- In re J.P.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2019-04-30· cited 39×
- In re S.C.Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga County· 2018-06-28· cited 35×
- In re E.B.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2017-05-04· cited 20×
- In re S.G.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2016-12-27· cited 15×
- In re I.H.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2017-03-07· cited 4×
- In re J.D.Ohio Court of Appeals· 2014-12-26· cited 2×
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.