In re S.L.
South Dakota Supreme Court
1DissentHenderson, Justice
The majority opinion, after establishing that the law of this State requires evidence that is clear and convincing to justify findings of dependency and neglect and to support termination of parental rights, proceeds to reduce that relatively high standard to nothing. I dissented when this was done in In re K.C., 414 N.W.2d 616, 621-25 (S.D.1987) (Henderson, J., dissenting), and I must dissent today.
Clear and convincing evidence is that which is so clear, direct, weighty, and convincing so as to allow the trier of fact to reach a clear conviction of the precise facts at issue without…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Shelton v. TuckerSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Lehman Ex Rel. Lehman v. Lycoming County Children's Services AgencySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- In re R. Z. F.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
- Blow v. LottmanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1953
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.