Santosky v. Kramer
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Blackmun
Under New York law, the State may terminate, over parental objection, the rights of parents in their natural child upon a finding that the child is “permanently neglected.” N.Y. Soc. Serv. Law §§384 — b.4.(d), 384-b.7.(a) (McKinney Supp. 1981-1982) (Soc. Serv. Law). The New York Family Court Act § 622 (McKinney 1975 and Supp. 1981-1982) (Fam. Ct. Act) requires that only a “fair preponderance of the evidence” support that finding. Thus, in New York, the factual certainty required to extinguish the parent-child relationship is no greater than that necessary to award money damages in an ordinary…
2Cases cited46 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal & Correctional ComplexSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5,921 opinions
- Price Waterhouse v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- In the interest of C.H.Texas Supreme Court · 2002
- In the Interest of J.F.C.Texas Supreme Court · 2002
- Lee v. City Of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
5,916 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.