Skip to content
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 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
Name: In re Brianna S.
Case #: B301802
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 01/28/2021

The requirements of Welfare and Institutions Code section 387 apply where the Agency seeks to remove a child from placement with a relative. Brianna and two of her younger siblings were placed with their maternal grandmother, who was declared the minors' de facto parent. While in grandmother's care, the mental and emotional health of all three minors deteriorated. Grandmother admitted she was overwhelmed by the children's behaviors and that she threatened the children with being placed elsewhere or institutionalized. The Department filed a Welfare and Institutions Code section 387 petition, alleging that grandmother's home did not meet RFA requirements and…

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 K.T.
Case #: E072082
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 11/12/2019

The distant relatives of a dependent child had standing to appeal trial court's order under section 387; also, they had standing to appeal the denial of their section 388 petition. The minor was placed with relatives, the B's, when he was removed from his mother at the age of nine months. While residing with them, he was diagnosed with a subdural hematoma. Meanwhile, the B's began refusing to communicate with the social worker, who they felt had insulted them. The Department detained the minor, placed him in a special health care needs foster home, and filed a…

View Full Summary
Name: In re L.M.
Case #: D075120
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 09/12/2019

The juvenile used the proper standard when it found that it would be in the best interest of a 10-month-old child to remove her from her de facto parents and place her with her sister's adoptive parents. Four years prior to the minor's birth, her older half-sibling had been placed with Mr. and Mrs. E., and subsequently adopted by them. When the minor was born testing positive for methamphetamine, the E.'s told the Agency they wanted her placed with her half-sibling in their home. Because the E.'s had recently moved to Florida, it took some time for them…

View Full Summary
Name: In re C.W.
Case #: A152993
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 03/29/2019

The juvenile court abused its discretion in awarding custody of the minor to his father where father, a convicted child sex abuser, failed to participate in services or treatment of any kind and lived far away from child welfare officials. Following a dependency proceeding in which the parents failed to reunify, the minor was placed in long-term foster care. The minor wanted contact with his mother and hoped to live with her again, but wanted no contact with his father. Two years after the permanent plan had been selected, C.W. traveled to Louisiana to visit his father, and…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Cody R.
Case #: D073527
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 12/17/2018

Parent had no standing to challenge the social worker's actions under the relative placement statutes where there was no showing that she could have reunified. The child was removed from parental custody after he was found severely malnourished to the point of starvation. The juvenile court sustained a dependency petition and bypassed reunification services based on a finding of severe physical abuse. It set a hearing under section 366.26. The court did not advise the parents that they could challenge this order only by way of a writ petition, but mother filed a notice of intent to file such a…

View Full Summary
Name: In re J.Y.
Case #: C082548
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 12/26/2018

A parent lacked standing after termination of reunification services to contest a change in a minor's placement to a tribe-approved home. The juvenile court removed three minors from mother's custody based on her mental illness and substance abuse. Their father was a member of the Pit River Tribe. The court placed J.Y. separately from his siblings while the social services agency sought an "ICWA-approved home." After services had been terminated, the agency located such a home and sought to place all three children there together. Mother opposed the change in J.Y.'s placement, and appealed from the order that granted…

View Full Summary