Steven H. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security
Court of Appeals of Arizona
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
- Batterton v. FrancisSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Matter of Baby Boy DoeIdaho Supreme Court · 1995
- Stapert v. Arizona Board of Psychologist ExaminersCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2005
- Rachelle S. v. Arizona Department of Economic SecurityCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1998
- 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
- Steven H. v. Arizona Department of Economic SecurityArizona Supreme Court · 2008