Legal Opinion

Idaho Department of Health & Welfare v. Doe

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided November 30, 2010No. 37453PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BURDICK, Justice.

John Doe, biological father of Jane Doe (“Jane”), appeals the magistrate court’s decision that he never perfected any parental rights to Jane and that, if he did have parental rights, his rights are terminated on grounds of abandonment, neglect and Jane’s best interest. John Doe argues that he did not know he was Jane’s biological father until he was served with the termination papers, from which point he has acted in a manner entitling him to parental rights. We affirm.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Jane is the youngest of four children born to Jane Doe II (“Mother”).…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Lehr v. RobertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Caban v. MohammedSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Doe v. RoeIdaho Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Steve B.D. v. SwanIdaho Supreme Court · 1986

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Idaho Department of Health & Welfare v. DoeIdaho Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Idaho Department of Health & Welfare v. DoeIdaho Supreme Court · 2017
  3. Termination of Parental Rights of John Doe (2014-25)Idaho Supreme Court · 2015
  4. Doe v. Idaho Department of Health and WelfareIdaho Supreme Court · 2013
  5. H&W v. Jane Doe (2016-32)Idaho Supreme Court · 2017

1 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