In the Interest of M.D., K.T., G.A., E.A. and S.A., Minor Children
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
CHRISTENSEN, Justice (concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I agree with the majority's holding that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in denying the mother's motion for continuance. I also agree this court should vacate the decision of the court of appeals, reverse the decision of the juvenile court, and remand the case for an expedited hearing. But, I cannot agree to the majority's onerous mandates for juvenile court judges and their effects on court reporters. As a matter of sound judicial administration, incarcerated parents generally should be permitted to participate…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Meier v. SENECAUT IIISupreme Court of Iowa · 2002
- In Re Interest of LVNebraska Supreme Court · 1992
- Iowa Civil Liberties Union v. CritelliSupreme Court of Iowa · 1976
- Bowers v. Polk County Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Iowa · 2002
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.