Washington Supreme Court· 10/27/2016

R.B. v. C.W.

Citations

186 Wash. 2d 828
383 P.3d 492

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that ICWA applies to the non-Indian parent's parental rights, and thus, active efforts must be taken to reunify the child with the non-Indian parent
noting, for purposes of ICWA and WICWA, an “Indian family” is an Indian child’s family, regardless of the parent’s Indian status
ICWA active efforts are “premised not on the Indian status of the parents but is instead based on whether the child is an Indian child.”
“the more protective act will supplant the less protective act”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fairhurst, González, Johnson, Madsen, McCloud, Owens, Stephens, Wiggins

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

26 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

51 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named R.B. v. C.W.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

R.B. v. C.W.
Court of Appeals of Washington· 2015-07-07· cited 14×

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.