Warren Dudenhefer v. Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “Cannot be maintained in the community” is too ambiguous to meet the statutory stan- dard
• concluding that the juvenile court’s written finding that youth “cannot be maintained in the community” was not an adequate explanation why OYA commitment was better for the youth than to remain with his family (internal quotation marks omitted)
• concluding that the juvenile court’s written finding that youth “cannot be maintained in the community” was not an adequate explanation why OYA commitment was better for the youth than to remain with his family (internal quotation marks omitted)
• explaining that if the court intended to convey a written finding that OYA custody was the only way for a youth’s “specific needs” to be met, it needed to explain “that conclusion or what those needs are in the commit- ment order”
• explaining that if the court intended to convey a written finding that OYA custody was the only way for a youth’s “specific needs” to be met, it needed to explain “that conclusion or what those needs are in the commit- ment order”
• excusing the preservation requirement for a similar argument for a youth committed to OYA custody when the juvenile court failed to include adequate written findings under ORS 419C.478(1)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).