In THE INTEREST OF G. R. B., a Child

How courts have described this case

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

• reversing because although there was admission of past drug use by the father, there was no evidence of concurrent drug use during the dependency case
• explaining the new Juvenile Code’s use of the term “dependent” rather than “deprived” child
• “the record must contain evidence of present [dependency], not 17 merely past or potential future [dependency]
• because there was no evidence child was harmed by parents’ physical altercations and domestic violence, evidence did not support finding of deprivation
• “[T]he party who brings the petition alleging [dependency], not the parent from whose custody the child is being removed, carries the burden of proof.”
• “Indeed, the definition of ‘deprived’ focuses ‘upon the needs of the child regardless of parental fault.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).