Legal Opinion

In the Interest of H.F.G. v. E.G.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 27, 2005No. Nos. WD 65382 and WD 65383PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HAROLD L. LOWENSTEIN, Judge.

E.G. (Mother) and P.G. (Father) each appeal the trial court’s termination of their respective parental rights of H.F.G. (Child), born October 18, 2001, claiming that the trial court erred because it failed to make certain statutorily mandated findings and because the judgment is not supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence. The Juvenile Office did not respond to Mother’s or Father’s brief. Because the circuit court did not make the required findings under section 211.447.4(3),1 this court reverses the circuit court’s judgment and remands with directions…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. In the Interest of K.A.W.Supreme Court of Missouri · 2004
  2. Juvenile Officer v. P.S.L.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2000
  3. In the Interest of J.M.N.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. Interest of M.G. v. T.H.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2000

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In the INTEREST OF K.M.A.-B.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2016
  2. In the Interest of C.K.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2007
  3. In the INTEREST OF K.M.A.-B.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API