 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| In re Marriage of Winders, No. 6-114 / 05-1289,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not err in failing to give wife credit for full amount of her inheritance; the difficulty in determining exact amount wife received was of her own making and thus she should only have been allowed an offset for the exact amount of the inheritance she had proven she had received--payments totaling $ 36,980 not the $ 65,000 she claimed.
|
|||||
| In re Marriage of Windschitl, No. 6-105 / 05-1079,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In marital dissolution, trial court erred in denying husband's Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.977 motion to set aside default judgment as, inter alia, husband asserted claim in good faith; instant action was a dissolution, and default decree awarded wife sole custody of children and, more importantly, ordered husband would not receive any rights of visitation.
|
|||||
| In re Ziegler, No. 6-028 / 05-0911,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err in dismissing father's custody modification petition where he did not demonstrate that he would be a superior caretaker for his child and the child's interests were best served by remaining in mother's physical care; in addition, district court did not abuse discretion in admitting evidence of father's abusive behavior.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of A.S., No. 6-177 / 06-0084,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although mother argued that trial court should have ordered that the permanency goal be her reunification with her child and should have given mother another six months to pursue reunification, trial court's order placing child with her father was affirmed, where mother had not made the effort to comply with case permanency plan requirements.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of C.W., No. 6-120 / 06-0010,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father's parental rights to his son were properly terminated pursuant to Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(h) where child could not be safely returned to father's custody; father would be unable to provide appropriate parenting and it was not in child's best interests to place him with his grandmother. Father would not accomplish reunification in six months.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of D.D. ., No. 6-175 / 05-1974,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court correctly found that termination of father's parental rights to his children was in their best interests and deferral of termination was not warranted where he was arrested for drug possession, was jailed, would not complete substance abuse treatment, and had minimal contact with children, and they were thriving in new environment.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of G.M.R., No. 6-030 / 05-1037,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order terminating mother's parental rights to her child was upheld where there was clear and convincing evidence that she abandoned child under terms of Iowa Code § 600A.8(3)(b); mother's actions and statements had resulted in no-contact order, and, consequently, she had not maintained substantial and continuous or repeated contact with the child.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of J.W., No. 6-176 / 06-0055,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father's parental rights were properly terminated under Iowa Code § 232.116(1)(b) because he abandoned his daughter, as the child only recalled meeting her father one time, the father had not made a genuine effort to maintain communication or association with the child, and the father not shown a continuing interest in the child.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of K.K., No. 6-145 / 06-0008,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order terminating father's parental rights to his children was upheld where father admitted that children were removed from his care because he relapsed on methamphetamine. Social worker recommended against extension of time to facilitate reunification given father's probation violations, frequent relapses, and extent that family went to use drugs.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of M.S. , No. 6-121 / 06-0040,
COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of mother's parental rights under Iowa Code § 232.116 was upheld; after she participated in services very early in proceedings, she failed or refused to meaningfully participate in necessary and required services, and termination was in children's best interests, as mother continued to have mental health and substance abuse problems.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
