Legal Opinion

Steven H. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided January 3, 2008No. 1 CA-JV 07-0076PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

TIMMER, Judge.

¶ 1 Steven H. and Tammy H. (collectively “Parents”) appeal the juvenile court’s ruling that two of their children, Matthew H. and Savannah H. (collectively “Children”), who are Indians and therefore subject to the Indian Child Welfare Act (“ICWA”), 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901-1963 (2000), are dependent as to Parents pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) section 8-201(13)(a) (2007). Among other things, Parents argue the court erred because a qualified expert did not opine that Parents’ continued custody of Children would likely result in serious emotional or physical…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Batterton v. FrancisSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  2. Matter of Baby Boy DoeIdaho Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Stapert v. Arizona Board of Psychologist ExaminersCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
  4. Rachelle S. v. Arizona Department of Economic SecurityCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
  5. Lashonda M. v. Arizona Department of Economic SecurityCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Steven H. v. Arizona Department of Economic SecurityArizona Supreme Court · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API