Skip to content
Name: In re Matthew M.
Case #: B319258
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 7
Opinion Date: 03/06/2023

The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion when it authorized the vaccination against COVID-19 of twelve-year-old dependent minor over the objection of Mother. The minor was removed from his parents and placed in a therapeutic care home due to minor's emotional and behavioral challenges. At the six-month review hearing, Mother asked that the minor be exempted from receiving the COVID-19 vaccine due to religious beliefs and concern about possible side effects. The juvenile court noted that Mother had not provided evidence of an appropriate religious exemption and authorized vaccination of the minor. Mother did not appeal those findings and…

View Full Summary
Name: In re J.M.
Case #: B313754
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 03/02/2023
Subsequent History: Ordered published 3/10/2023

Continued jurisdiction was not necessary when the minors were doing well in Mother's care and a finding of detriment pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 361 was not required because it was in the minors’ best interests to award Mother full physical custody. The minors were removed from their parents due to "ongoing parental conflict," in which Father was the primary aggressor. One of the minors, J., was exhibiting serious mental health concerns as a result of the family dynamic in the home. The minors were placed with maternal grandparents and the parents were ordered to participate in reunification…

View Full Summary
Name: In re N.M.
Case #: B315559
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 02/01/2023
Subsequent History: Ordered published 3/2/2023

The juvenile court’s exit orders were an abuse of discretion where they sought to punish Father rather than serve the best interests of the minor. The minor was removed from Mother due to alcohol abuse and was released to the previously noncustodial Father. The minor continued to live in maternal grandmother’s home because Father’s work schedule did not allow him to care for the minor full time. Mother completed her court-ordered case plan, but Father did not comply with drug testing orders, and visited with the minor inconsistently due to his work schedule. At the final review hearing, the juvenile…

View Full Summary
Name: A.H. v. Superior Court
Case #: G061648
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 03/17/2023

The juvenile court properly found temporary emergency jurisdiction over the minors pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA). Three minors were detained when police observed signs of physical abuse on them. Mother and stepfather, who was the biological father of the youngest minor, were arrested. The family had recently relocated to the area from Texas and were living in a motel. The father of the older two children was incarcerated in Texas. The juvenile court took emergency jurisdiction pursuant to the UCCJEA. About a week later, the juvenile court contacted the Texas state court, which said…

View Full Summary
Name: D.S. v Superior Court
Case #: E079017
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 02/15/2023
Subsequent History: Modified 2/22/2023

The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) inquiry duties mandated by section 224.2 are not limited to biological relationships. Mother is the adoptive mother of the minor. The minor was removed from Mother due to allegations of physical abuse. Mother denied Indian ancestry and provided contact information for several relatives. At the jurisdictional and dispositional hearing, the juvenile court found that ICWA did not apply, denied Mother further reunification services, and set the matter for a section 366.26. hearing. Subsequently, Mother filed a section 388 petition seeking to have minor returned to her home, which the juvenile court summarily denied. Mother…

View Full Summary
Name: In re A.A.
Case #: E079176
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 02/16/2023

Eligibility as a “naturalized member” but not as an enrolled member of a tribe is insufficient to trigger the substantive and procedural safeguards of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). The minors were removed from Mother and placed in foster care. Father and his relatives denied any Indian ancestry. Mother was an enrolled member of the Jemez Pueblo tribe. The Agency contacted the tribe who said that the tribe requires individuals to have ¼ Jemez Pueblo blood quantum to be eligible for membership.  Therefore, the minors were only eligible to be "naturalized members" (qualifying for tribal health services) but not…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Jayden G.
Case #: B321426
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 8
Opinion Date: 02/14/2023

The Agency did not exercise due diligence in its attempts to locate Father for service when it failed to follow up with unique facts more likely to yield his whereabouts. The minor and his younger sibling were removed from Mother and a petition was filed.  Mother reported that Father was in jail and had an upcoming hearing date but could not provide Father's exact date of birth. Mother also reported that paternal grandfather lived on her street. The Agency reported that Father's whereabouts were unknown and filed a declaration of due diligence which stated that it had searched Internet law…

View Full Summary
Name: In re M.C.
Case #: A165424
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 02/06/2023

There was insufficient evidence to support a finding by clear and convincing evidence that placing the minor with Father would be detrimental. The minor came to the attention of the Agency when his half-brother was born testing positive for drugs. The minor was in the care of a family friend while Mother gave birth because Father was a trucker who often had to travel for days at a time. Father offered to make arrangements for placement with his relatives until he could return to California. At a contested jurisdiction and disposition hearing, the court found true allegations against Father, finding…

View Full Summary
Name: In re L.B.
Case #: A165001
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 02/16/2023

There was sufficient evidence to support jurisdictional findings where the parents' custody order was insufficient to protect the minor and this was not the only basis for jurisdiction. The minor was removed from Mother due to domestic violence with the father of Minor's younger siblings and Mother's mental and physical health, including substance abuse. The minor had been residing with Father prior to removal. Mother had sent him to live with Father because of the domestic violence in her home. The custody order provided for the minor to spend the summer with Father and the school year with Mother. Following…

View Full Summary
Name: In re T.R.
Case #: E079291
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 01/18/2023
Subsequent History: Ordered published 1/27/2023

Bypass of reunification services pursuant to section 361.5, subdivision (b)(6) was improper where severe physical abuse occurred in a prior dependency case and Father had promptly engaged in predisposition services. The minors were removed from the parents due to domestic violence, excessive corporal punishment, and Mother’s sexual abuse of one of the minors. The minors had previously been removed five years earlier due in part to physical abuse by Father, who was then subsequently bypassed pursuant to section 361.5, subdivision (b)(6) [infliction of severe physical harm]. In the months leading up to the jurisdiction/disposition hearing in the present case, Father…

View Full Summary