Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite In Re the Welfare of R.T.B., 492 N.W.2d 1.
- In re the Welfare of the Child of J.K.T. 814 N.W.2d 76 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
- In re the Welfare of J.R.B. 805 N.W.2d 895 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
-
In re the Welfare of J.R.B.
805 N.W.2d 895
Minn. Ct. App. 2011
In analyzing a child’s best interests, “the court must balance three factors: (1) the child’s interest in preserving the parent-child relationship; (2) the parent’s interest in preserving the parent-child relationship; and (3) any competing interest of the child.”
- In re the Welfare of the Child of J.L.L. 801 N.W.2d 405 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
- In Re Welfare of Children of D.M.T.-r. 802 N.W.2d 759 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
- In Re Welfare of Children of D.M.T.-r. 802 N.W.2d 759 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
- In re the Welfare of the Child of J.L.L. 801 N.W.2d 405 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
- In Re the Welfare of the Child of W.L.P. 678 N.W.2d 703 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
-
In Re the Welfare of the Child of W.L.P.
678 N.W.2d 703
Minn. Ct. App. 2004
“In analyzing the best interests of the child, the court must balance three factors: (1) the child’s interest in preserving the parent-child relationship; (2) the parent’s interest in preserving the parent-child relationship; and (3) any competing interest of the child.”
- In Re the Child of Simon 662 N.W.2d 155 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
- In Re the Child of Simon 662 N.W.2d 155 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
- In Re the Welfare of J.R. 655 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2003
- In Re the Welfare of S.R.A. 527 N.W.2d 835 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
-
In Re the Welfare of S.R.A.
527 N.W.2d 835
Minn. Ct. App. 1995
(“The parents’ rehabilitation, or lack thereof, during all periods * ⅜ * leading up to the termination hearing is relevant to the court’s ultimate decision”); (father palpably unfit due to alcohol and drug abuse, incarceration, and failure to *839 maintain any relationship with child for more than two years).
- In Re the Welfare of J.D.N. 504 N.W.2d 54 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
-
In Re the Welfare of J.D.N.
504 N.W.2d 54
Minn. Ct. App. 1993
ANALYSIS “As a matter of law, termination of parental rights is not a preferred action.” quoted in