Guardianship of Phillip B.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RACANELLI, P. J.
Few human experiences evoke the poignancy of a filial relationship and the pathos attendant upon its disruption in society’s effort to afford every child a meaningful chance to live life to its fullest promise. This appeal, posing a sensitive confrontation between the fundamental right of parental custody and the well being of a retarded child, reflects the deeply ingrained concern that the needs of the child remain paramount in the judicial monitoring of custody. In reaching our decision to affirm, we neither suggest nor imply that appellants’ subjectively motivated…
2Cases cited46 opinions
- Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- In Re GAULTSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Armstrong v. ManzoSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court, County of NorfolkSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division v. CraftSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- In Re Cheryl E.California Court of Appeal · 1984
- Alber v. Illinois Department of Mental Health & Developmental DisabilitiesDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1992
- Getty v. GettyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
- San Diego County Health & Human Services Agency v. Robert W.California Court of Appeal · 2013
- Broden v. Marin Humane SocietyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.