Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
S275578
|
Modification: In re Dezi C.
Failure to conduct an adequate inquiry under the Indian Child Welfare Act requires conditional reversal to comply with the statute's inquiry provisions. |
Dependency |
|
Sep. 16, 2024 | |
B332002
|
In re Gilberto G.
Evidence of single instance of alcohol abuse while caring for children did not support finding mother posed risk of danger to her children at the time of the jurisdiction hearing. |
Dependency |
|
J. Segal | Sep. 16, 2024 |
B332310
|
In re V.S.
Juvenile court abused its discretion in choosing, sua sponte, guardianship over adoption. |
Dependency |
|
A. Collins | Sep. 11, 2024 |
B332985
|
Dora V. v. Superior Court (Los Angeles County Dept. of Children and Family Services)
Legal guardian appointed by the juvenile court was not entitled to a presumption of reunification services with minor. |
Dependency |
|
G. Martinez | Sep. 5, 2024 |
S275578
|
In re Dezi C.
Failure to conduct an adequate inquiry under the Indian Child Welfare Act requires conditional reversal to comply with the statute's inquiry provisions. |
Dependency |
|
K. Evans | Aug. 20, 2024 |
S276649
|
In re Kenneth D.
Absent exceptional circumstances, a reviewing court may not consider postjudgment evidence to conclude an inadequate Indian Child Welfare Act inquiry was harmless. |
Dependency |
|
C. Corrigan | Aug. 20, 2024 |
B326007
|
In re N.J.
Concluding relative placement preference did not apply was error where social services failed to exercise due diligence in complying with statutory duty to assess adult relative for possible placement. |
Dependency |
|
A. Collins | Aug. 13, 2024 |
E082653
|
In re Zoe H.
Jurisdictional findings are not prima facie evidence for removal other than a finding of severe physical abuse of children under five. |
Dependency |
|
F. Menetrez | Aug. 12, 2024 |
E082812
|
In re S.R.
Juvenile court improperly inferred that mother's failure to protect her daughter from being sexually abused meant that her son was at substantial risk of physical harm. |
Dependency |
|
F. Menetrez | Aug. 8, 2024 |
E082619
|
In re B.H.
Dependency jurisdiction over minor children was proper where Mother acknowledged that the children should not drive with Father due to concern about his drinking and driving, but still allowed him to transport the children the next day. |
Dependency |
|
M. Raphael | Jul. 8, 2024 |
B327625
|
In re B.D.
Dependency petition should not have been granted where Department of Family Services failed to demonstrate that mother who tested positive for opiates failed to provide regular care for her children. |
Dependency |
|
R. Adams | Jul. 2, 2024 |
A168850
|
In re A.F.
Juvenile court had jurisdiction over children who could suffer potential abuse from alleged father. |
Dependency |
|
V. Rodriguez | Jun. 11, 2024 |
E082401
|
In re D.M.
Termination of parental rights was appropriate despite failure to inquire with extended family regarding child's possible indigenous heritage because the child was placed in temporary custody pursuant to a warrant. |
Dependency |
|
F. Menetrez | May 9, 2024 |
B318672
|
In re Kieran S.
Despite *In re N.R.*'s ruling, where parent's substance abuse put child at substantial risk of serious physical harm, juvenile court's decision to remove child from parent was appropriate. |
Dependency |
|
J. Segal | May 7, 2024 |
C099704
|
H.A. v. Superior Court (San Joaquin County Human Services Agency)
Agency and juvenile court failed to meet Indian Child Welfare Act's statutory duty to further inquire when its investigation ceased after parents validated they had no Native American background. |
Dependency |
|
R. Robie | May 6, 2024 |
B330106
|
In re S.G.
Once minor parent consistently failed to utilize reunification services, termination of parental rights was appropriate to protect the child's need for prompt resolution of his custody. |
Dependency |
|
R. Adams | Apr. 1, 2024 |
B326320
|
In re Ca.M.
Appellate court did not need to review the sufficiency of domestic violence evidence to uphold removal order because there was ample evidence the children were at risk from father's alcohol abuse. |
Dependency |
|
L. Baker | Mar. 20, 2024 |
B333788
|
F.K. v. Superior Court (Santa Barbara County Child Welfare Services)
Juvenile court was not required to terminate reunification services after six months even though it found mother had not substantially complied with her case plan. |
Dependency |
|
H. Baltodano | Mar. 19, 2024 |
B329192
|
In re F.V.
There was insufficient evidence of future risk to minor--who was sent into the U.S. alone when her father was unable to cross the border--to support juvenile court's jurisdiction. |
Dependency |
|
H. Bendix | Mar. 7, 2024 |
E080888
|
In re Samantha F.
Duty of inquiry about child's possible Native American ancestry extended to all available family members regardless of how child was removed from custody. |
Dependency |
|
M. Raphael | Feb. 26, 2024 |
D082615
|
In re H.D.
Because under Welfare and Institutions Code Section 311 "probation officer" was analogous to "social worker," juvenile court had authority to issue restraining order against juvenile's mother. |
Dependency |
|
J. Castillo | Feb. 16, 2024 |
B324755
|
In re Lilianna C.
Welfare and Institutions Code Section 213.5 allows the juvenile court to issue permanent restraining order in situations in which the petition was filed by someone other than a probation officer. |
Dependency |
|
B. Hoffstadt | Feb. 12, 2024 |
B327716
|
In re R.M.
Juvenile court improperly made minor a dependent child where parents were incarcerated for murder but capable of making preparations for relatives to care for the child. |
Dependency |
|
L. Lavin | Feb. 1, 2024 |
C097776
|
In re A.K.
Order terminating biological father's parental rights was reversed after juvenile court and County agency failed to follow statutorily-mandated notice requirements. |
Dependency |
|
S. Boulware Eurie | Jan. 31, 2024 |
B321592
|
In re P.H., Jr.
Indian Child Welfare Act did not require tribal notice of dependency proceedings without a reason to know the child was a Native child despite statements regarding parents' possible tribal ancestry. |
Dependency |
|
L. Baker | Jan. 17, 2024 |
B331041
|
L.C. v. Superior Court (Los Angeles County Dept. of Children and Family Services)
Because the mother had been sober and stayed in contact, there was not substantial evidence supporting the juvenile court's finding that minor was at a substantial risk of detriment. |
Dependency |
|
G. Feuer | Jan. 17, 2024 |
F086109
|
In re L.B.
Juvenile court's refusal to apply Welfare and Institutions Code Section 361.5(b)(13)'s bypass provision (for resisting substance abuse treatment) to determine eligibility for reunification services was erroneous. |
Dependency |
|
J. Detjen | Jan. 11, 2024 |
A167363
|
In re L.B.
Inquiry into dependent child's possible Native ancestry was inadequate where the record indicated the existence of extended family members that were not asked whether the child was a Native child. |
Dependency |
|
J. Hiramoto | Jan. 3, 2024 |
S274943
|
In re N.R.
For purposes of obtaining dependency court jurisdiction, parental substance abuse does not require medical professional diagnosis. |
Dependency |
|
P. Guerrero | Dec. 15, 2023 |
B326119
|
In re Kayla W.
Court did not violate UCCJEA in terminating parental rights without consulting Nevada court, which had already relinquished jurisdiction. |
Dependency |
|
L. Edmon | Nov. 16, 2023 |