DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite In Re Petition of Parks, 267 Minn. 468.

25 citing documents.

  • In Re the Welfare of A.M.P. 507 N.W.2d 616 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
  • In Re the Welfare of A.M.P. 507 N.W.2d 616 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
    Provisions abrogating the necessity of parental consent to adoption should be “construed strictly in favor of the parent and the preservation of the relationship.” In re Parks, 267 Minn. 468 , 474
  • Larson v. Dunn 460 N.W.2d 39 Minn. 1990
  • In Re the Welfare of A.K.K. 356 N.W.2d 337 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • In Re the Welfare of A.K.K. 356 N.W.2d 337 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    However, because termination statutes are in derogation of the common law, they must be strictly construed in favor of the parental relationship, In re Petition of Parks, 267 Minn. 468, 474 , and trial courts must make clear and specific findings which conform to the statutory requirements.
  • In Re Welfare of H. M. P. W. 281 N.W.2d 188 Minn. 1979
  • In Re Welfare of H. M. P. W. 281 N.W.2d 188 Minn. 1979
    Parental rights should not be terminated “except for grave and weighty reasons.” See, In re Parks, 267 Minn. 468 , 474
  • Petition of Linehan 280 N.W.2d 29 Minn. 1979
  • Petition of Linehan 280 N.W.2d 29 Minn. 1979
    We stated: “Appellant’s natural rights, as the mother of Troy, are of such fundamental importance that she should not be deprived of them except for ‘grave and weighty reasons.’ In re Petition of Parks, 267 Minn. 468, 474 , ” 295 Minn. 444 , .
  • Matter of Welfare of Rosenbloom 266 N.W.2d 888 Minn. 1978
  • Matter of Welfare of Rosenbloom 266 N.W.2d 888 Minn. 1978
    McDonald v. Copperud, 295 Minn. 440, 444 , In re Petition of Parks, 267 Minn. 468, 474
  • In Re Niskanen 223 N.W.2d 754 Minn. 1974
  • In Re Niskanen 223 N.W.2d 754 Minn. 1974
    See, In re Petition of Alsdurf, 270 Minn. 236 , In re Petition of Parks, 267 Minn. 468
  • McDonald v. Copperud 206 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 1973
  • McDonald v. Copperud 206 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 1973
    a result of a divorce decree should not be extinguished so as to prevent such parent from seeking custody in the event of death, subsequent divorce, or other changes in circumstances of the prevailing party.” Appellant’s natural rights, as the mother of Troy, are of such fundamental importance that she should not be deprived of them except for “grave and weighty reasons,” In re Petition of Parks, 267 Minn. 468, 474
  • Eggert v. Van De Weghe 155 N.W.2d 454 Minn. 1967
  • Eggert v. Van De Weghe 155 N.W.2d 454 Minn. 1967
    In re Petition of Parks, 267 Minn. 468 , 127 N. W. (2d) 548 ; In re Petition of Nelson v. Bye, 271 Minn. 194 , 135 N. W. (2d) 700 ; In re Petition of Wilson v. Barnet, 275 Minn. 32 , 144 N. W. (2d) 700 .
  • Wilson v. Barnet 144 N.W.2d 700 Minn. 1966
  • Wilson v. Barnet 144 N.W.2d 700 Minn. 1966
    In re Petition of Parks, 267 Minn. 468, 476 , 127 N. W. (2d) 548, 554 .
  • Nelson v. Bye 135 N.W.2d 700 Minn. 1965
  • Nelson v. Bye 135 N.W.2d 700 Minn. 1965
    “No child shall be adopted without the consent of his parents * * * except in the following instances: *197 “(b) Consent shall not be required of a parent who has abandoned the child, or of a parent who has lost custody of the child through a divorce decree, and upon whom notice has been served as required by section 259.26.” This issue must be resolved by what we said in In re Petition of Parks, 267 Minn. 468 , 127 N. W. (2d) 548 .
  • In Re Alsdurf's Petition 133 N.W.2d 479 Minn. 1965
  • State ex rel. Sadler v. Alsdurf 133 N.W.2d 479 Minn. 1965
  • In Re Alsdurf's Petition 133 N.W.2d 479 Minn. 1965
    More recently our views were expressed in In re Petition of Parks, 267 Minn. 468, 474 , , 553: "* * * The correlative rights and duties inherent in the parent-child relationship are natural rights of such fundamental importance that it is generally held that parents should not be deprived of them `except for grave and weighty reasons.'
  • State ex rel. Sadler v. Alsdurf 133 N.W.2d 479 Minn. 1965
    No court would deprive a parent of his child simply because someone else might give it better care or attention than the means of the parent permit.” More recently our views were expressed in In re Petition of Parks, 267 Minn. 468, 474 , 127 N. W. (2d) 548 , 553: “* * * The correlative rights and duties inherent in the parent-child relationship are natural rights of such fundamental importance that it is generally held that parents should not be deprived of them ‘except for grave and weighty rea