Legal Opinion

In re the Dependency & Neglect of N.A.H.

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided January 20, 1988No. 15750PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Per curiam

M.A.H. (Mother) appeals from a disposi-tional order which terminated her parental rights and those of R.W. (Father) to their *311daughters, N.A.H. and K.A.H. Father has not appealed. We reverse.

Mother is an enrolled member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe and Father is apparently affiliated with the Crow Tribe of Montana. N.A.H. and K.A.H. are Indian children entitled to the benefits and protections of the Indian Child Welfare Act. (ICWA) 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901-1963. On appeal, Mother argues that the state failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, as required by ICWA. However, we need not address…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In re L.A.M.Alaska Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Long v. Knight Const. Co., Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1978
  3. In re K.A.B.E.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Lehr v. Department of Labor of South DakotaSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  5. People ex rel. C.R.M.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1981

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. In re M.C.P.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1989
  2. Department of Social & Health Services v. GilfillenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2005
  3. B.H. v. People ex rel. X.H.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2006
  4. People in Interest of JJSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
  5. In re J.T.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1997

16 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