In re Audrey S

1,000+ Citing cases

  1. In re Madison J.

    No. M2019-01188-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jul. 24, 2020)   Cited 2 times

    It is one of the oldest judicially recognized liberty interests. In re Carrington H., 483 S.W.3d at 521; In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838, 860 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). Although it is a fundamental right, it is not absolute.

  2. In re Brooke E.

    No. M2016-02370-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2017)   Cited 1 times

    The clear-and-convincing-evidence standard ensures that the facts are established as highly probable, rather than as simply more probable than not. In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838, 861 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005); In re M.A.R., 183 S.W.3d 652, 660 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005).* * *

  3. In re Mia C.

    No. E2023-00828-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 30, 2024)

    The clear-and-convincing-evidence standard ensures that the facts are established as highly probable, rather than as simply more probable than not. In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838, 861 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005);

  4. In re Jude M.

    619 S.W.3d 224 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2020)   Cited 25 times
    Finding willfulness where "although Father was not particularly pleasant or welcoming in response to Mother's occasional requests to visit the Child, he did consistently refer to the visitation requirements of the . . . order and inform Mother that she could visit the Child when she met the requirements"

    The clear-and-convincing-evidence standard ensures that the facts are established as highly probable, rather than as simply more probable than not. In re Audrey S. , 182 S.W.3d 838, 861 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005) ; In re M.A.R. , 183 S.W.3d 652, 660 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005).* * *

  5. In re J'Khari F.

    No. M2018-00708-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 31, 2019)   Cited 26 times
    Noting both In re Ayden S. and In re Amynn K. but ultimately concluding that the petitioner presented sufficient evidence that "Mother was not able or willing to assume physical or legal custody of or financial responsibility for the Child"

    The clear-and-convincing-evidence standard ensures that the facts are established as highly probable, rather than as simply more probable than not. In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838, 861 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005); In re M.A.R., 183 S.W.3d 652, 660 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005).* * *

  6. In re Johnathan M.

    591 S.W.3d 546 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2019)   Cited 18 times

    Specific findings of fact and conclusions of law "facilitate appellate review and promote just and speedy resolution of appeals." In re Audrey S. , 182 S.W.3d 838, 861 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). When a trial court fails to comply with this requirement, appellate courts "must remand the case with directions to prepare the required findings of fact and conclusions of law."

  7. In re Chase L.

    No. M2017-02362-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jun. 29, 2018)   Cited 9 times

    A central inquiry regarding abandonment by failure to visit is whether the abandonment was willful. See Tenn. Code Ann. ยง 36-1-102(1)(A)(i); see also In reAudrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838, 863 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005) ("The concept of "willfulness" is at the core of the statutory definition of abandonment.") . This Court has explained the concept of willfulness in prior cases:

  8. In re Erin N.

    No. E2021-00516-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 14, 2022)   Cited 2 times

    The clear-and-convincing-evidence standard ensures that the facts are established as highly probable, rather than as simply more probable than not. In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838, 861 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005); In re M.A.R., 183 S.W.3d 652, 660 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). * * *

  9. In re Matthew K.

    E2020-00773-COA-R3-PT [1] (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 13, 2021)

    The clear-and- convincing-evidence standard ensures that the facts are established as highly probable, rather than as simply more probable than not. In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838, 861 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005); In re M.A.R., 183 S.W.3d 652, 660 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005). * * *

  10. In re Serenity S.

    No. E2019-00277-COA-R3-PT (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 31, 2020)   Cited 17 times
    Holding that two visits were of such an infrequent nature as to merely establish minimal or insubstantial contact

    The clear-and-convincing-evidence standard ensures that the facts are established as highly probable, rather than as simply more probable than not. In re Audrey S., 182 S.W.3d 838, 861 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005); In re M.A.R., 183 S.W.3d 652, 660 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2005).* * *