Legal Opinion
In the Interest of S.A.P.
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided March 17, 2004No. 10-02-345-CVPublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BILL VANCE, Justice.
Rebecca Williams Peterson’s and Jay Scott Peterson’s parental rights to S.A.P. were terminated in November 2002. They each brought several issues on appeal, complaining about (1) the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence, (2) the testimony of Dr. Jim Shinder, and (3) the effect of letters from the Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services (“TDPRS”) that indicated the Department had ruled out their involvement in the alleged abuse or neglect that precipitated S.A.P.’s removal. In addition, Rebecca raises two issues regarding the constitutionality…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Johnson & Higgins of Texas, Inc. v. Kenneco Energy, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1998
- City of Hutchins v. PrasifkaTexas Supreme Court · 1970
- Roberts v. Haltom CityTexas Supreme Court · 1976
- Clear Lake City Water Authority v. Winograd, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1985
- Dallas County Flood Control District No. 1 v. Cross, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- In the Interest of S.A.P.Court of Appeals of Texas · 2005
- Charlie Julius Gonzales v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2005
- Hector Rene Galvez v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2008
- In Re Graves, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2007
- In Re Graves, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2007
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.