Jackson v. W.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the protective services guidelines defining “mental abuse” are not unconstitutionally vague
• holding that defendant’s speculation that a “founded” complaint of child abuse would possibly damage his reputation and employment opportunities was “not sufficient to trigger due process”
• rejecting claim that DSS proceeding may serve as predicate for criminal prosecution because Commonwealth, not DSS, must bring criminal charges
• stating “the fact that there may be room for interpretation does not necessarily render [a statute] impermissibly vague”
• noting the similarity of language and stating that “our analysis of the due process issue applies equally to both state and federal law”
• applying the factors and explaining that “[u]nder this balancing test, we weigh the competing interests of the government and the private party and consider the value and cost of requiring additional procedures”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).