Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 229 P3D 818 - In Re Ppt

In Re Ppt’s Empirical Analysis

2010

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
June 2015
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 125 Wash. 2d 277 - Westerman v. Cary · Spokane Co. v. State Ex Rel. Co. Comrs. · In Re Dependency of KSC · 123 Wash. App. 244 - In Re Dependency of AC · In Re Dependency of JC

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(a) That the child has been found to be a dependent child; (b) That the court has entered a dispositional order pursuant to RCW 13.34.130; (c) That the child has been removed or will, at the time of the hearing, have been removed from the custody of the parent for a period of at least six months pursuant to a finding of dependency; (d) That the services ordered under RCW 13.34.136 have been expressly and understandably offered or provided and all necessary services, reasonably available, capable of correcting the parental deficiencies within the foreseeable future have been expressly and understandably offered or provided; (e) That there is little likelihood that conditions will be remedied so that the child can be returned to the parent in the near future]: and] (f) That continuation of the parent and child relationship clearly diminishes the child’s prospects for early integration into a stable and permanent home.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.