In Re the Welfare of S.L.J.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MAGNUSON, Chief Justice.
We are asked to decide whether the district court erred in appointing private counsel at county expense, rather than a public defender at state expense, for the parent in this juvenile-protection case, who must be provided counsel under the federal Indian Child Welfare Act, 25 U.S.C. § 1912(b) (2006). The court of appeals affirmed the appointment of private counsel for the parent in this case and further held that the cost of private counsel appointed for the parent is a county obligation. We affirm the court of appeals. 1
In June 2008, the Minnesota State Board…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- In Re the Welfare of J.B.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 49 v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
- Nationwide Corp. v. Northwestern National Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1958
- Breza v. City of MinnetristaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
- INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 524 v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. RandolphSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- In re the Guardianship of TschumyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013
- Houck v. EASTERN CARVER COUNTY SCHOOLSCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- ARRM v. PiperDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2018
- Jedidiah Dean Troxel v. State of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.