In re Steed
Texas Court of Appeals
2008 WL 2132014 (2008)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) (plaintiff) received a distress call from a child living on the Yearning for Zion Ranch, which was associated with the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS). DFPS interviewed the children on the ranch and found that five minors were or had been pregnant. DFPS also found that FLDS had a pervasive belief system that condoned polygamous marriage, underage marriage, and underage child-bearing. DFPS alleged immediate danger to the children’s physical health and safety and petitioned the district court to remove all of the children who were living on the ranch. DFPS argued that the girls on the ranch who had reached puberty were in immediate danger due to the ranch’s condoning of underage pregnancy. DFPS also argued that all of the children were in danger due to the pervasive belief system, which taught boys to commit sexual abuse later in life and girls to submit to sexual abuse after reaching puberty. The district court granted the petition, issuing temporary orders naming DFPS as the custodian of the children. The Relators (defendants), consisting of 38 women living on the ranch whose children had been taken into custody but were not and had not been pregnant, petitioned the Texas Court of Appeals for a writ of mandamus, seeking to vacate the district court’s order and retain custody of their children during litigation of the issue.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.