Legal Opinion

In the Interest of M.H.

Court of Appeals of Kansas

Decided November 7, 2014No. 111,024PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Leben, J.:

Father, E.H, appeals from the district court’s order terminating his parental rights to M.H. He argues that the district court erred in two ways: (1) by failing to notify M.H.’s potential Indian tribe in compliance with the procedures outlined in the Indian Child Welfare Act (the Act) and its accompanying guidelines; and (2) by holding that clear and convincing evidence supported finding him unfit to parent M.H.

Father is correct that the Act requires that a party seeking to terminate the parental rights of a child that may be Native American must follow specific procedures for…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State v. WardSupreme Court of Kansas · 2011
  2. In the Interest of B.D.-Y.Supreme Court of Kansas · 2008
  3. In re K.B.Montana Supreme Court · 2013
  4. In re MorrisMichigan Supreme Court · 2012
  5. In the Interest of H.D.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 1986

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. In re D.G.Supreme Court of Kansas · 2024
  2. In re Estate of FieldCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2018
  3. In re A.C.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 2020
  4. In re A.P.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 2020
  5. In re A.P.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 2020

18 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