New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency v. N.C.M. and T.E. and J.C. in the Matter of the Guardianship of T.M., M.L.W., and M.A.J.M.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding the Division satisfied the fourth prong with expert testimony that the children had developed a \secure[] attach[ment]\ to their resource parent but had only an \insecure attachment\ to their legal parent
• concluding the Division satisfied the fourth prong with expert testimony that the children had developed a \secure[] attach[ment]\ to their resource parent but had only an \insecure attachment\ to their legal parent
• finding prong four satisfied where expert testified the child had a secure attachment to their resource parent and not the biological parent
• stressing the need for \well[-]qualified expert\ testimony concerning bonding evaluations (quoting In re Guardianship of J.C., 129 N.J. 1, 19 (1992))
• finding an expert's unrebutted opinion that the 56 A-2802-19 children were \securely attached\ to the resource parent but had an \insecure attachment\ to the parent proved prong four

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).