In re S.O.

issues include whether the court had jurisdiction to enter permanency order awarding permanent guardianship of juvenile to foster parents; whether findings of fact support court's conclusion that parents are unfit and acted inconsistently with their constitutionally protected status; whether trial court erred by failing to notify appellants-parents of the right to file a motion for review; and whether evidence supported court's reunification findings and conclusions

Files

These files may not be suitable for users of assistive technology. If you are having trouble accessing these files, you may request an accessible format.

Summary

issues include whether the court had jurisdiction to enter permanency order awarding permanent guardianship of juvenile to foster parents; whether findings of fact support court's conclusion that parents are unfit and acted inconsistently with their constitutionally protected status; whether trial court erred by failing to notify appellants-parents of the right to file a motion for review; and whether evidence supported court's reunification findings and conclusions