Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

89 S.W.3d 29

Docket No. 01-1070.

In Re NK

In the Interest of N.K. and D.T.K., Children.

Texas Supreme Court

Decided July 3, 2002.

Texas Supreme Court · decided 2002-07-03

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently June 2003

4 state decisions

Relies on In the interest of C.H. · In the Interest of N.K.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2002-07-03

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Jana Edith Turner, David C. Turner, Jr., Turner Meeham & Porter, Bonham, for Petitioner.

¶2Joseph Lawrence Sheppard, Burleson, John Cornyn, Attorney General of the State of Texas, Howard G. Baldwin, First Assistant Attorney General, Philip A. Lionberger, Jeffrey S. Boyd, Office of the Attorney General of Texas, Julie Caruthers Parsley, Office of the Solicitor General of Texas, Austin, for Respondent.

¶3*30 PER CURIAM.

¶4In this case, the trial court terminated the parent-child relationship between Casey K. and her children N.K. and D.T.K. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's decision. 54 S.W.3d 499, 506. In doing so, the court of appeals reviewed the evidence under the traditional factual sufficiency standard, holding that the court would "sustain a factual sufficiency challenge only if we conclude that the finding is so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust." Id. at 504. Our decision today in In re C.H.,89 S.W.3d 17, (Tex.2002), rejects that approach. Accordingly, without hearing oral argument, we grant the petition for review without reference to the merits, vacate the court of appeals' judgment, and remand this case to that court for further proceedings. See Tex.R.App. P. 59.1, 60.2(f).

/89/sw3d/29 · .json · Public domain