Legal Opinion
Steven H. v. Arizona Department of Economic Security
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided August 19, 2008No. CV-08-0026-PRPublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RYAN, Justice.
¶ 1 In a custody proceeding involving an Indian child, a state court must comply with the Indian Child Welfare Act (“ICWA”), 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901 to 1963 (2000). Under ICWA, before a state court judge may order foster care placement of an Indian child, the judge must make “a determination, supported by clear and convincing evidence, including testimony of qualified expert witnesses, that the continued custody of the child by the parent or Indian custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child.” 25 U.S.C. § 1912(e). We must decide if §…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Negonsott v. SamuelsSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- E. A. v. State, Division of Family & Youth ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2002
- L.G. v. State, Department of Health & Social ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
- State Ex Rel. Department of Revenue v. Capitol Castings, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2004
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Ballesteros v. American Standard InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 2011
- Valerie M. v. Arizona Department of Economic SecurityArizona Supreme Court · 2009
- In The Interest of M.F.Supreme Court of Kansas · 2010
- In the Interest of D.S.Court of Appeals of Iowa · 2011
- Navajo Nation v. Arizona Department of Economic SecurityCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 2012
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.