Robert T. v. Superior Court

ORDER



Appellate Opinion Decertified IN RE ASHLEY, ROBERT AND DANIEL T., et al., Minors ROBERT T., Petitioner v. LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, Respondent No. S075723 C.A. 2nd, Division Seven, No. B124710 California Supreme Court Filed February 17, 1999

Petition for review DENIED.
        Kennard, J., is of the opinion the petition should be granted.
        The Reporter of Decisions is directed not to publish in the Official Appellate Reports the opinion in the above entitled appeal filed November 24, 1998, which appears at 67 Cal.App.4th 1472. (Cal. Const., art. VI, section 14; rule 976, Cal. Rules of Court.)




[Editor's Note - For your convenience we reprint below the Daily Journal's ruling column brief which summarized the earlier decision of the lower court.]


JUVENILES

Father informed child isn't his and only latter evidence proves he is, father entitled to extended re-unification period.

        The C.A. 2nd has ruled that a father of three children declared dependents of the juvenile court, was entitled to an extension of reunification services where the father established paternity just prior to a court order terminating reunification services.
        Ashley T. and Robert T., Jr. were allegedly emotionally abused and neglected by their parents, Robert T and Mother. A social worker for the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services found the family living in a garage with no doors, no windows and no ventilation. The trial court sustained the Department's petition declaring Ashley and Robert, Jr. dependents of the court. In July 1997, the Department filed a new petition alleging that Daniel, a new born, had tested positive for amphetamines and suffering from drug withdrawal symptoms. Mother declared another man as Daniel's father. Robert became aware that he was actually Daniel's father in July 1998, three weeks prior to the trial court's termination of reunification services as to all three children. The trial court found the appropriate six month period for reunification had been offered to Robert. The trial court subsequently declared Daniel T. a dependent of the court. Robert T. sought an extraordinary writ of the juvenile court's order setting a hearing for the selection and implementation of a permanent plan for all three children, with the possibility of termination of the parental relationship.
        The C.A. 2nd issued the writ. Where cases involve exceptional circumstances, the court has the discretion to extend reunification services beyond the statutory limit. Robert was entitled to a minimum of six months of reunification services with Daniel, but received none due to his and the court's lack of knowledge of his paternity. Robert was entitled to an extension of the reunification period as to that Daniel. Because all three children were placed together with their grandmother, they desired to reunite with Robert and Robert made significant changes to comply with the case plan, a proper exercise of discretion required a continuance of the matter and an extension of reunification services for Robert beyond the statutory period with respect to all three children. This is consistent with the policy favoring preservation of the family unit and to preserve the bond between the children themselves.

        Robert T. v. Superior Court (Los Angeles County Dept. of Children and Family Services), C.A. 2nd, No. B124710, filed November 24, 1998, by Johnson, J.
        The full text of this case appears in 98 Daily Journal DAR on page 12071, November 30, 1998.