Case Summaries

Family Law

[07/01] In re Cheyanne F.
Order terminating the parental rights of a mother pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 is affirmed over claims that the juvenile court erroneously omitted information required for notification forms under the Indian Child Welfare Act.

[06/30] Mardardo F. v. Superior Court (Yolo County Dep't of Employment and Social Serv.)
For purpose of Welfare and Institution Code section 361.5(b)(4), the phrase "the parent or guardian of the child" refers merely to the parent's or the guardian's current status in the current dependency proceeding, and the phrase "the death of another child" in the section means the death of any other child. In this case, the juvenile court properly applied the statute in denying reunification service to a 28 year old father who murdered a 13-year old girl when he was 15.

[06/26] Florida Dep't of Children and Families v. H.D.
Initial acceptance of review of the decision in H.D. v. Department of Child and Families, 964 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) is reversed and the review proceeding is dismissed since jurisdiction was improperly granted.

[06/26] In re S.B.
An order terminating the parental rights to a child under Welfare and Institutions Code1 section 366.26 is reversed and remanded where: 1) the terminated parent had a continuing beneficial relationship with the child within the meaning of the statutory exception to termination of parental rights; and 2) the juvenile court did not comply with the notice provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act.

[06/23] In re R.J.
Denial of a grandmother's request for de facto parent status is affirmed over claims that: 1) the juvenile court erred in denying her request without affording an evidentiary hearing; and 2) the error violated her right to procedural due process.

[06/19] In re Jorge G.
Juvenile court's jurisdictional and dispositional order removing a child from parental custody is vacated and remanded where the juvenile court properly invoked temporary emergency subject matter jurisdiction under Family Code section 3424, subdivision (a), but the service of notice to the child's parents in Mexico was improper under either Mexican or California law.

[06/18] In re Kristen B.
Juvenile court's jurisdictional and dispositional findings from parental custody proceedings are affirmed over claims that: 1) minor received ineffective assistance of counsel when the minor's counsel was impermissibly argumentative and undermined the minor's credibility on direct examination; and 2) the duty of loyalty prohibits a minor's attorney, whose position diverges from that of his or her client, from calling the minor as a witness.

[06/12] In the Matter of Giaquinto v. Comm'r of New York Dep't of Health
In an appeal presenting the issue of whether a party in a health care related matter was entitled to recover attorney's fee from the commissioner of the New York State Department of Health under 42 U.S.C. section 1988(b) or whether such claims were barred under the Eleventh Amendment, the matter is remitted for a determination of (1) petitioner's claim that respondent's calculation of his wife's "community spouse resource allowance" (CSRA) violated a provision of the federal Medicaid Act and (2) petitioner's request for section 1988 attorney's fees. Based on the record, the Court of Appeals could not determine whether the lower court in fact awarded fees on federal grounds.

More...