Legal Opinion

In re A. E. M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 26, 1981No. 2939PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge:

Appellant contends that the lower court erred in awarding custody of three of her children to the Children’s Bureau of Monroe County because the Children’s Bureau failed to establish that the children were “dependent” as defined by the Juvenile Act.1 For the reasons which follow, we vacate the order of the court below and remand for further proceedings.

On August 11, 1980, the Children’s Bureau filed a petition pursuant to the Juvenile Act in which it alleged that A.E.M., J.J.M., and S.L.M., then ages 12, 11, and 9 respectively, were dependent children because their natural…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. In the Interest of LaRueSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  2. In the Interest of BlackSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  3. In the Interest of PernishekSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  4. In Interest of Theresa E.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. In Re Donna W.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. In the Interest of Ryan Michael C.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  2. In the Interest of Michael Y.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  3. Matter of Mark T.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  4. Matter of JacksonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  5. In Re BarclaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API