Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
B300214
|
In re S.R.
Courts may determine whether caregivers have a sexual interest in children to draw reasonable inferences on risks of substantial harm. |
Dependency |
|
H. Bendix | Apr. 27, 2020 |
B297416
|
In re J.A.
Dependency petitions based on substance abuse must also show the child faced substantial risk of harm from the substance abuse. |
Dependency |
|
L. Rubin | Apr. 22, 2020 |
E073805
|
In re A.M.
Riverside County Department of Public Social Services did not fail to comply with notice and inquiry requirements of Indian Child Welfare Act. |
Dependency |
|
C. Codrington | Apr. 6, 2020 |
E072671
|
In re C.P.
Absolute statutory bar to placement of child in grandparents' custody would be unconstitutional as to them if they establish on remand that they have parental relationship. |
Dependency |
|
M. Raphael | Mar. 30, 2020 |
D076517
|
In re D.S.
Juvenile court's finding that ICWA did not apply was proper because Agency's further inquiry and due diligence was 'proper and adequate.' |
Dependency |
|
P. Guerrero | Mar. 26, 2020 |
G058062
|
In re B.E.
Reunification bypass provision intended for parents who refuse to participate in court-ordered drug treatment program, not parents who relapse on road to recovery. |
Dependency |
|
R. Ikola | Mar. 25, 2020 |
B300468
|
In re N.D.
Under Indian Child Welfare Act, Child Welfare Services has continuous duty to investigate if child is or may be Indian child. |
Dependency |
|
A. Garcia | Mar. 17, 2020 |
B287406
|
In re Justin O.
Juvenile court abused its discretion in denying grandmother's requests for de facto parent status because there were no factual findings in support of denial. |
Dependency |
|
H. Bendix | Mar. 4, 2020 |
B295780
|
In re D.P.
Incorporating Dependency Court Order 415 into a removal order without stating facts that support removal does not comply with Welfare and Institutions Code Section 361(e). |
Dependency |
|
A. Egerton | Feb. 10, 2020 |
A156489
|
In re William M.W.
Social Services Agency can meet its discovery obligations under California Rule of Court 5.546 by making all discoverable materials available for inspection and copying. |
Dependency |
|
G. Sanchez | Dec. 19, 2019 |
B298289
|
In re Adam H.
Juvenile court erroneously failed to consider Welfare and Institutions Code Section 361.2(a) in evaluating whether minor should be placed with his father. |
Dependency |
|
L. Rubin | Dec. 9, 2019 |
C088052
|
In re J.R.
Juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in terminating dependency jurisdiction because ample evidence showed, among other things, that minor's best interests were considered most important and discussed throughout proceedings. |
Dependency |
|
H. Hull | Nov. 26, 2019 |
E072082
|
In re K.T.
A denial of a petition to regain child custody under Welfare and Institutions Code Section 388 grants relatives standing to appeal a child removal order issued under Section 387. |
Dependency |
|
M. Ramirez | Nov. 14, 2019 |
D075120
|
In re L.M.
Juvenile court did not err in considering minor's proposed placement, rather than solely removal, in applying the best interest standard, and juvenile court's finding was supported by substantial evidence. |
Dependency |
|
W. Dato | Sep. 16, 2019 |
A155254
|
Modification: In re B.D.
Family Services Bureau's Welfare and Institutions Code Section 366.26 report violated statutory obligations by omitting evidence material to adoptability and was so inadequate that minor's due process rights were denied. |
Dependency |
|
J. Streeter | Jun. 28, 2019 |
A155254
|
In re B.D.
Family Services Bureau's Welfare and Institutions Code Section 366.26 report violated statutory obligations by omitting evidence material to adoptability and was so inadequate that minor's due process rights were denied. |
Dependency |
|
J. Streeter | May 29, 2019 |
A153925
|
In re Caden C.
No reasonable court could have concluded that a compelling justification had been made for forgoing adoption under beneficial relationship exception; thus, judgment was reversed. |
Dependency |
|
G. Sanchez | Apr. 11, 2019 |
A152993
|
In re C.W.
Finding a child is at risk in a parent's custody and yet ordering the child placed with that parent is abuse of discretion, thwarts purpose of dependency juvenile courts. |
Dependency |
|
T. Stewart | Apr. 1, 2019 |
D074022
|
In re Charlotte C.
Minor's counsel entitled to receive copy of her client's case file, including any Resource Family Approval Program-related information, upon request pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code Section 317(f). |
Dependency |
|
P. Benke | Mar. 27, 2019 |
C086808
|
In re D.D.
Substantial evidence supported juvenile court's findings that the previous disposition of returning the children to mother's custody had not been effective in protecting the children under Welfare and Institutions Code Section 387. |
Dependency |
|
H. Hull | Mar. 7, 2019 |
H045544
|
In re L.D.
Challenge to sufficiency of Indian Child Welfare Act notice untimely when raised in appeal of post-jurisdictional order that does not 'subsume' the notice's sufficiency. |
Dependency |
|
A. Grover | Feb. 26, 2019 |
D074064
|
In re N.O.
Under Welfare and Institutions Code Section 364(c), minor's counsel did not show that conditions still existed that would justify the court's initial assumption of jurisdiction over minor; thus, termination of jurisdiction affirmed. |
Dependency |
|
P. Benke | Feb. 1, 2019 |
A153896
|
In re E.T.
Because mother regularly met with children and children had a substantial attachment to her such that termination would cause great harm, parental benefit exception applied to termination of parental rights. |
Dependency |
|
P. Siggins | Jan. 14, 2019 |
B284833
|
In re G.B.
The court erred when, after dismissing all the allegations in petition, it adjudicated jurisdiction allegations against father of child based on factual and legal basis not at issue in original petition. |
Dependency |
|
L. Lavin | Oct. 23, 2018 |
B287849
|
In re D.Y.
Welfare and Institutions Code Section 366.3(a) did not obligate the dependency court to retain jurisdiction simply because the relative legal guardian objected to termination; the decision remained in the court's discretion. |
Dependency |
|
A. Collins | Sep. 10, 2018 |
E068981
|
In re M.W.
Former caregiver not disqualified as a non-minor dependent's supervised independent living placement simply because she formerly was dependent's foster parent. |
Dependency |
|
R. Fields | Sep. 4, 2018 |
A152434
|
In re Daniela G.
Juvenile court can refuse to compel the testimony of children, when the possible due process benefit would not warrant the psychological harm it would cause the child. |
Dependency |
|
J. Humes | May 31, 2018 |
A153034
|
T.J. v. Superior Court
Reunification services must be both tailored and accessible; where constant delays mar reunification services arranged for parent, such services are inadequate. |
Dependency |
|
J. Streeter | Apr. 2, 2018 |
B282855
|
In re R.H.
Judgment finding good cause to depart from Indian Child Welfare Act placement preferences affirmed where tribe shows disinterest in matter. |
Dependency |
|
S. Perren | Feb. 5, 2018 |
A145384
|
In re E.R.
Maternal uncle who was adjudged as having lost 'Indian custodian status' lacks standing to appeal placement decisions as to minors. |
Dependency |
|
T. Reardon | Dec. 22, 2017 |