Santosky v. Kramer
452 U.S. 958, 101 S. Ct. 3106, 69 L. Ed. 2d 969, 49 U.S.L.W. 3953, 1981 U.S. LEXIS 2492
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Santosky v. Kramer. Read the opinion of the Court — 455 U.S. 745 →
Opinion
App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 3d Jud. Dept. [Certiorari granted, 450 U. S. 993.] Motion of H. Randall Bixler to permit Stephen Seavuzzo, Esquire, to present oral argument pro hac vice granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Santosky v. Kramer, 452 U.S. 958, 101 S. Ct. 3106, 69 L. Ed. 2d 969, 49 U.S.L.W. 3953, 1981 U.S. LEXIS 2492 (1981).
452 U.S. 958 (Santosky v. Kramer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.