In Re the Welfare of V.R.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUSPENI, Judge.
This is an appeal by appellants father and mother from the Juvenile Court’s determination that V.R., P.R., and L.R. are dependent and neglected children as defined by Minn.Stat. § 260.015, subd. 6(b), (d) and subd. 10(b)-(e) (1982). Mother and father also contend that the trial court abused its discretion in denying their motion for a fourth continuance and by denying their motion for a new trial or to reopen the trial for the presenting of further witnesses. We affirm in part and vacate in part.
FACTS
V.R. is the natural daughter and B.R. is the natural son of mother.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. TurnipseedSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- State v. VailSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
3Cited by7 opinions
- In Re the Welfare of R.B.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
- In Re the Welfare of S.J.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
- In Re the Welfare of S.G.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
- In re the Welfare of J.W.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
- In re the Welfare of A.S.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.