Napper v. Beyer

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a nine-month delay in entry of a custody review order prejudiced the parties
• concluding that a nine-month delay in entry of a custody review order prejudiced the parties
• holding that the statutory preference for relative placement and compliance with the ICPC are not mutually exclusive
• holding that this Court had no jurisdiction to review intervention order when appellants did not reference order in notice of appeal
• holding that the statutory preference for relative placement and compliance with the ICPC are not mutually exclusive
• noting that “had [DSS] requested another review hearing earlier or petitioned for writ of mandamus, some of the delay may have been avoided”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).