Legal Opinion

In Re Adoption of Durham

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 28, 1983No. 192PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SPAETH, Judge:

This appeal is from an order involuntarily terminating appellant’s parental rights to her three children. We have concluded that the trial court applied an incorrect standard of proof, and unduly restricted the evidence. We therefore reverse and remand for a new hearing.

In Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 102 S.Ct. 1388, 71 L.Ed.2d 599 (1982), the Court held that parental rights may not be involuntarily terminated except upon at least clear and convincing evidence. In In Re Adoption of M.E.T., 313 Pa.Super. 316, 459 A.2d 1247 (1983), we held

that any case in which a party’s…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. In Re Adoption of McCraySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  3. Matter of Adoption of David C.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
  4. In Re Adoption of M. T. T.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  5. In Re Adoption of M.E.T.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. In Re Adoption of AtencioSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. In Re Adoption of HamiltonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Engle v. West Penn Power Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  4. In re E.S.M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  5. In Re BowmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995

6 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