State ex rel. N.C.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “..... (4) Grant guardianship of the child to a nonparent. (5) Make such other disposition or combination of the above dispositions as the court deems to be in the best interest of the child. .....”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State ex rel. P.F. · 253 So. 3d 877 - State ex rel. D.E.

2. “A. At any time in a child in need of care proceeding when a child is in the custody of the department, the department may file a motion for a judicial determination that efforts to reunify the parent and child are not required. B. The department shall have the burden of demonstrating by clear and convincing evidence that reunification efforts are not required, considering the health and safety of the child and the child's need for permanency. C. Efforts to reunify the parent and child are not required if a court of competent jurisdiction has determined that: (1) The parent has subjected the child to egregious conduct or conditions, including but not limited to any of the grounds for certification for adoption pursuant to Article 1015. * * * * D. If the court determines that reunification efforts are not required, it shall document that determination by written findings of fact. A permanency hearing, which considers in-state and out-of-state permanent placement options for the child, may be conducted immediately and shall be conducted within thirty days after the determination.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 248 So. 3d 524 - State ex rel. B.A.T.

3. “In a manifest error review, it is important that the appellate court not substitute its own opinion when it is the juvenile court that is in the unique position to see and hear the witnesses as they testify. [State in the Interest of N.C., 50,446 (La.App. 2 Cir. 11/18/15), 184 So.3d 760 )]; [State ex rel. L.M.,] 46,078 (La.App. 2 Cir. 1/26/11), 57 So.3d 518 . Where there is conflicting testimony, reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of fact should not be disturbed upon review, even when the appellate court may feel that its own evaluations and inferences are as reasonable as those of the juvenile court. Id. If the juvenile court’s findings are reasonable in light of the record reviewed in its entirety, the appellate court may not reverse, even though convinced that, had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently. Id.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State ex rel. N.B.