Legal Opinion

In re Welfare of the Child of R.K.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided September 13, 2017No. A17-0497Published

1Dissent 1

DISSENT

2Dissent · GildeaGildea, Chief Justice

I respectfully dissent. Almost 20 years ago, the Minnesota Judicial Branch adopted the Children’s Justice Initiative, the goal of which is to ensure permanency for children in a fair and timely manner. See Minn. State Court Administrator’s Office, Minnesota Judges Juvenile Protection Benchbook § 1.04 (2011). The Children’s Justice Initiative directs us to look to the best interests of the child at every step in our process because “from a child’s view, a delay is a delay regardless of the reason.” In re Welfare of J.R., 655 N.W.2d 1, 5 (Minn. 2003); see Minn. Judicial Council,…

3Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. of Durham Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. In Re the Welfare of J.R.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
  3. Christenson v. ChristensonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
  4. State v. HohenwaldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
  5. In re M.O.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API