In Re the Welfare of P.R.L.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CRIPPEN, Judge
Challenging the trial court’s decision to lift a stay and enter an order terminating her parental rights, appellant Roxanne La’Near contends that the court did not make the necessary findings of fact. We reverse and remand.
FACTS
Eleven-year-old P.L. and his two older siblings (who have been placed in long-term foster care and whose parentage is not at issue in this case) have been in out-of-home placement since June 1996. In January 1998, the county petitioned to terminate appellant’s parental rights to P.L., alleging that appellant had neglected her children; that both…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Marriage of Sefkow v. SefkowSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- In Re the Welfare of M.D.O.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- Matter of Welfare of ChosaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Matter of Welfare of C. ChildrenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
- Matter of Welfare of MaasCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- In Re the Welfare of P.R.L.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2001