In re Natalie S.

How courts have described this case

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

• because \none of the parties disputed these jurisdictional facts or otherwise attempted to challenge the representations made by counsel ... the trial court was entitled to rely on these factual representations\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Freeman
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2022-08-30· cited 7×
• State v. Freeman (Dissent)
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2022-08-30

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Golding
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1989-12-19· cited 2,736×
• State v. Smith
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2008-11-25· cited 99×
• Brown v. Brown
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1985-01-29· cited 41×
• State v. Tabone
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2011-07-26· cited 19×
• Piccioni v. Piccioni
  Court of Appeals of Arkansas· 2011-03-02· cited 4×

Other cases named In re Natalie S.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• In re Natalie S.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2016-05-05· cited 2×