In re Search Warrant No. 16-960-M-01 to Google

How courts have described this case

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

• holding where at least one “legal parent” of a child consents, the third party has standing to pursue a claim for a psychological parent relationship
• holding where at least one “legal parent” of a child consents, the third party has standing to pursue a claim for a psychological parent relationship
• noting a court may not resolve conflicting factual averments on material issues without a plenary hearing
• explaining a court cannot make A-3993-19 35 credibility determinations based on conflicting affidavits or certifications
• “A parent’s ‘consent’ to the creation of a psychological parent bond need not be explicit.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).