Search for: "State v. Family Child Care" Results 21 - 40 of 3,104
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 May 2022, 9:59 am by The Petrie-Flom Center Staff
The law requires the party placing the child in foster care to prove active efforts to rehabilitate and reunify the Indian family. [read post]
23 Mar 2008, 6:21 am
Actions of state officials undertaken in a reasonable belief of suspected child abuse that even interfere with family rights are protected by qualified immunity. [read post]
30 Oct 2011, 12:01 pm by jollyangela
Filed under: Child Support, Custody, Divorce Tagged: child support, custody, divorce, family law [read post]
23 Mar 2023, 2:03 pm by mhpslaw
Navigating the complexities of parental relocation can be stressful for any family, especially when the custodial parent asks — can I move out of state with my child? [read post]
27 Aug 2022, 10:54 am by Georgialee Lang
Dilico Anishinabek Child and Family Care 2022 ONCA 240 where the court considered whether the child’s caregivers since she was 8-days old could bring a parenting application pursuant to the Children’s Law Reform Act. [read post]
20 Jun 2018, 1:43 pm by Victoria Clark
(b)  The Secretary shall not, however, detain an alien family together when there is a concern that detention of an alien child with the child’s alien parent would pose a risk to the child’s welfare. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 9:43 am by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
  The WHD Interpretation states that the FMLA does not require an employee who intends to assume the responsibilities of a parent to prove that he or she provides both day-to-day care and financial support to be found to stand in loco parentis to a child. [read post]
8 Feb 2015, 11:59 am by Giles Peaker
A short Upper Tribunal decision has put an end to bedroom tax appeals based on the ‘part-time’ residence of a child of a separated family with shared care. [read post]
30 Dec 2011, 7:09 am by Kristen Woods
In a recent Ontario Court of Justice motion decision, Juneau v. [read post]
8 Sep 2014, 6:57 am by Joy Waltemath
Considering the issue, the court noted that in Coleman v Court of Appeals of Maryland, the Supreme Court distinguished the “self-care” provision concerning an employee’s own serious health condition from the “family-care” provisions, which concern the birth, adoption, foster care of a child, or the caring of a covered family member who has a serious health condition. [read post]