Legal Opinion

In Re Billy W.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided May 11, 2005No. 92, September Term, 2004PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBattaglia, J.

In this action between the biological parent, Tammy B., and the State we have been asked to consider whether the trial court properly admitted hearsay testimony, within the context of a permanency planning hearing in which the court maintained extant permanency plans for children who previously had been declared in need of assistance. We decline to reach the admissibility issue, however, because the trial court’s orders, from which the appeal was taken, continuing the permanency plans for the children, do not constitute final judgments nor appealable interlocutory orders.

I. Facts and…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. Meyer v. NebraskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  5. Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. of Durham Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Douglas v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2011
  2. Rush v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2008
  3. In Re: Adoption/guardianship of Rashawn H.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
  4. St. Joseph Medical Center, Inc. v. Cardiac Surgery Associates, P.A.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2006
  5. Metro Maintenance Systems South, Inc. v. MilburnCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015

19 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