Legal Opinion

In re the Welfare of S.I.

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided November 18, 2014No. Nos. 31727-7-III; 31728-5-IIIPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶1 A party who fails to appear in an action is not entitled to notice prior to entry of a default order. We are asked to decide whether a mother who appeared and participated in a dependency action yet failed to appear in a subsequent termination proceeding is required to receive notice prior to entry of a default order in the termination proceeding. We hold that a dependency proceeding is separate from a termination proceeding. We also hold that a parent’s appearance and participation in a dependency proceeding does not constitute an appearance in a later termination proceeding. Therefore, a…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. State v. SaintcalleWashington Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Scott v. Department of Social & Health ServicesWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  3. In Re Welfare of JMCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2005
  4. In re the Welfare of J.M.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2005
  5. Gage v. Boeing CompanyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1989

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. In re K.T.B.Utah Supreme Court · 2020
  2. In Re The Dep Of D.c-c., Janaye M. Clausen, V. DcyfCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2021
  3. In Re The Dependency Of: W.l.s. Jayna Palmer, App. v. State Of Wa., Dcyf, Res.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2020
  4. In Re The Welfare Of B.H. And G.H.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2021
  5. In Re The Welfare Of: K.d., Danielle Graves v. DcyfCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API