Skip to content
Name: In re V.C. (2023) 95 Cal.App.5th 251
Case #: A166527
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 09/06/2023

The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) section 224.2, subdivision (b) initial inquiry requirements apply when a minor is brought into custody pursuant to a warrant (section 340). Minors were removed from parents and parental rights were terminated in 2021. The termination was reversed on appeal and a new section 366.26 hearing was held in 2022 at which parental rights were again terminated. Parents appealed, raising the issue of the failure to comply with the initial inquiry requirements of ICWA. The reviewing court reversed, following the reasoning of In re Delila D. (2023) 93 Cal.App.5th 953, that section 224.2, subdivision (b)…

View Full Summary
Name: In re N.F. (2023) 95 Cal.App.5th 170
Case #: B318674
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 08/10/2023
Subsequent History: Ordered published 9/5/2023

The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) is not implicated at a post-permanency hearing which will not result in foster-care placement, termination of parental rights, preadoptive placement, or adoptive placement. The minor was removed from Mother in 2018. In 2021, a paternal uncle was appointed as minor’s legal guardian and dependency jurisdiction was terminated with Kin-GAP funding in place. Mother did not appeal this order. In 2022, Mother brought a 388 petition asking that her reunification services be reinstated as she had recently been released from incarceration. The 388 petition was denied and the court ordered that the dependency case remain…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Andres R. (2023) 94 Cal.App.5th 828
Case #: E079972
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 08/23/2023

The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) section 224.2, subdivision (b) initial inquiry requirements do not apply when a minor is brought into custody pursuant to a warrant (section 340). The minor was removed from his parents pursuant to a detention warrant. Mother denied Indian ancestry and Father claimed Cherokee ancestry. The Cherokee Nation said that the minor was not eligible to be enrolled in the tribe. Father appealed the jurisdictional and dispositional findings that adjudged the minor as a dependent of the court and removed minor from his custody, raising an ICWA initial inquiry failure. The appellate court affirmed. Division…

View Full Summary
Name: Hatley v. Southard
Case #: E080000
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 08/01/2023
Subsequent History: Ordered published 8/16/2023

The trial court erred in denying a request for Domestic Violence Restraining Order (DVRO) because the Domestic Violence Prevention Act (DVPA) includes behavior which amounts to “coercive control.” Hatley sought a DVRO protecting herself from Southard, her estranged husband. Hatley alleged that Southard had used suicide threats to manipulate her, used access to family finances and necessities, such as a telephone, as methods of control, isolated her by forcing her to depend on him for transportation, and sent threatening text messages. The trial court judge denied the DVRO finding that Hatley’s allegations did not fall within the DVPA as they…

View Full Summary
Name: In re R.F.
Case #: E079941
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 08/21/2023

Caretaker was entitled to a hearing on removal of minors in her care where the record showed a failure to provide caretaker with proper notice of removal. The minors were removed from their parents and placed with paternal grandparents. At the section 366.26 hearing, parental rights were terminated and adoption was chosen as the minors’ permanent plan. At the .26 hearing, minors’ counsel raised concerns about paternal grandfather’s alcohol use and a subsequent drug test found methamphetamine. The minors were removed pursuant to an emergency removal. The proof of notice filed with the court said that paternal grandmother (PGMA) was…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Jayden M.
Case #: B321967
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 07/27/2023

When considering a parent’s reasonable effort to address a problem from a previous dependency case, the juvenile court should look at the entire time period between when the earliest sibling was removed from the parent’s custody and the current dispositional hearing. The minor was removed from Mother in 2021 due to her drug use during pregnancy. The juvenile court had previously found jurisdiction over five of Minor’s six siblings. Minor’s oldest sibling was removed from Mother in 2001, when he was born testing positive for drugs. Two additional siblings were born positive for drugs in 2003 and in 2020. Mother…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Delila D.
Case #: E080389
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 07/21/2023

The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) section 224.2, subdivision (b) initial inquiry requirements apply when a minor is brought into custody pursuant to a warrant. The minor was removed from her parents pursuant to a detention warrant. The parents denied Indian ancestry. Mother appealed the subsequent termination of her parental rights, raising an ICWA initial inquiry failure, and the reviewing court conditionally reversed. Division Two of the Fourth Appellate District declined to follow its own precedent in In re Robert F. (2023) 90 Cal.App.5th 492 and In re Ja.O. (2023) 91 Cal.App.5th 672, because those decisions were themselves a departure…

View Full Summary
Name: In re M.D.
Case #: D081568
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 07/11/2023

Substantial evidence supported the juvenile court’s jurisdiction and disposition findings where the findings were not based solely on indigence, but also other factors. The eight-year-old minor (Minor) was removed from Father due to his failure to adequately supervise her and to provide her with adequate food and shelter. Father regularly left Minor unsupervised in their apartment without readily available food. The apartment was in an unsanitary condition. Minor was not enrolled in school and was far behind educational milestones. She lacked knowledge of basic hygiene and exhibited food insecurity behaviors. Father denied any wrongdoing and did not engage in predisposition…

View Full Summary
Name: Vinson v. Kinsey
Case #: A166582
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 06/27/2023
Subsequent History: Ordered published 7/26/2023

The denial of a request for a domestic violence restraining order (DVRO) was an abuse of discretion where the trial court failed to adequately consider the summation of evidence presented by petitioner or appreciate the varying responses of battered women. Vinson filed a request for a DVRO against Kinsey, the father of her two children. Vinson listed the most recent abuse as an incident where Kinsey had threatened her about a month prior. In addition to this incident, Vinson included prior incidents where Kinsey had punched her, destroyed furniture in the home, and sent threatening text messages. In support of…

View Full Summary
Name: In re D.P.
Case #: D081396
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 06/28/2023
Subsequent History: Ordered published 6/30/2023

(ordered published 6/30/2023)

The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in denying placement of the minor with the adoptive parents of minor’s siblings. The minor was removed from parents at birth and placed with Defacto Parents. Shortly after reunification services were terminated and the section 366.26 hearing was set, the adoptive parents of minor’s siblings (Adoptive Parents) filed a section 388 petition, requesting that minor be placed with them. Following an evidentiary hearing the juvenile court denied the petition, finding that it was not in minor’s best interest to be moved to another foster family. Minor and Adoptive Parents appealed…

View Full Summary