Skip to content
Name: In re C.P. (2023) 91 Cal.App.5th 145
Case #: E078696
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 05/05/2023

If the persons the minor is placed with have resource family approval, they are eligible to adopt the child in their care without an additional adoption home study. The minor was removed from his mother and placed with the maternal grandparents (MGPs). During the resource family approval process, a background check revealed that grandfather had a 1991 misdemeanor conviction for a disqualifying offense which had previously been dismissed pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.4. The Agency denied the MGPs application because of grandfather’s conviction. MGPs successfully appealed the juvenile court’s order denying their request that the Agency reassess their…

View Full Summary
Name: In re C.P.
Case #: E072671
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 03/26/2020

A statutory bar to placement based on a 28-year-old misdemeanor conviction was unconstitutional as applied. The minor was removed from mother in 2017 after he was sexually abused by a maternal uncle. At the time of removal, mother, the minor, and uncle all lived with the grandparents. Uncle went to prison for 20 years and mother did not keep contact with the Department. The minor was placed in foster care, and then in a group home. Mother failed to reunify, and the minor's permanent plan was a group home with the goal of identifying a…

View Full Summary
Name: In re J.M.
Case #: H046917
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/24/2020

Welfare and Institutions Code section 336.26(c)(4) allowed the juvenile court to select a permanent plan of legal guardianship with grandmother who could not take physical custody of the minor. Nine-year-old J.M. suffered an accident as an infant that left him entirely dependent on others for care. He is nonverbal and immobile. He became a dependent of the juvenile court because neither of his parents had completed the necessary training to be his caregivers, so he was not discharged from the hospital. Reunification services were ordered for his parents, but they did not participate, so services were…

View Full Summary
Name: In re J.R.
Case #: C088052
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 10/25/2019

The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion when it terminated dependency jurisdiction after establishing a guardianship for the minor with the grandparents he had lived with for two years. The minor originally came to the attention of the juvenile court in 2016 due to alcohol abuse by mother. The juvenile court adjudged him a dependent, removed him from mother and placed him with his maternal grandparents. Mother only minimally participated in services, and continued to relapse. The minor had previously refused to visit mother after her relapses. In 2018, the minor moved with his…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Maria Q.
Case #: D073296
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 10/23/2018

The relative placement preference under section 361.3 does not apply to a relative's request for placement after the juvenile court has held a section 366.26 hearing and the child remains in foster care pursuant to section 366.26, subd. (b)(7). Y.M. had four children who were dependents of the juvenile court, two girls and two boys. The girls were placed together in a foster home of the Z.'s, and the boys in a different foster placement. Y.M. identified the children's great aunt (Aunt) as a possible placement for the children. The 366.26 hearing was delayed and the minors…

View Full Summary
Name: In re D.Y.
Case #: B287849
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 09/06/2018

Juvenile court was not obligated to retain dependency jurisdiction when the legal guardian objected to termination, but it was error to terminate jurisdiction without adequate notice to the parties. The minor D.Y. was placed under the legal guardianship of his grandmother in 2001 when he was an infant. The court retained dependency jurisdiction over the minor for the next 16 years, with review hearings every six months. In late 2017, the juvenile court terminated dependency jurisdiction over the objections of the minor, his grandmother, and the Department. The court also denied the minor's request for a continuance…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Christian K.
Case #: A151695
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 03/21/2018

Juvenile court did not err by ordering overseas trip for minor, even if the minor would have benefited from additional therapy before going. Parental rights to the minor were terminated. Paternal grandparents, who live in Denmark, expressed interest in adopting the minor. The Department recommended weekly therapy for the minor to work on his relationship with his grandmother. The therapy was interrupted because of the foster family's unwillingness to provide transportation. Grandmother scheduled a month-long visit for the minor to visit her in Denmark prior to a permanent move. The juvenile court ordered the…

View Full Summary
Name: In re D.R.
Case #: B269663
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 8
Opinion Date: 12/14/2016

Where evidence did not support any exception to adoption, the juvenile court erred in choosing guardianship as the permanent plan for the minor. In 2013, the Agency filed a petition seeking jurisdiction over D.R. and her siblings. D.R. had lived with grandmother for most of her life, and father's whereabouts were unknown. When father became involved in the proceedings, he requested custody of D.R., but failed to appear for scheduled appointments. Neither parent reunified with the minor. At a 366.26 hearing, grandmother expressed her willingness to adopt D.R. Father objected to adoption, arguing that the…

View Full Summary
Name: A.M. v. Superior Court
Case #: E062316
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 06/08/2015

Juvenile court's specific placement order following termination of parental rights was not an appealable order. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.28.) The minor was born with serious birth defects and became a dependent of the juvenile court since his birth in 2007. His original permanent plan was placement at a health care facility with a goal of adoption. In 2010, the Department identified a potential placement and petitioned to change his permanent plan to adoption. The juvenile court terminated parental rights and authorized the Department to place the minor for adoption. The minor appealed. Result: the order was not appealable.…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Ethan J.
Case #: F070114
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 05/06/2015

Dismissal of dependency jurisdiction was reversed where minor refused to participate in visits with mother and court made no finding that visitation would be detrimental to him. The minor, Ethan, was in a guardianship with his grandmother, and refused to visit his mother, Monica. He also refused to participate in a therapeutic evaluation to determine whether visitation would be detrimental. At the conclusion of a contested review hearing, the juvenile court terminated dependency jurisdiction, stating that there was nothing it could do about the continued refusal of the minor to participate in visitation. On appeal, mother contended that the juvenile…

View Full Summary