Recently in Family Law Category

Trial court's order modifying support, where the child support order ended in August 2006 and no modification request was brought until February 2008, is reversed as: 1) it cannot be sustained on the basis of Family Code section 4326 and 2) where section 4326 was the sole basis for the modification, the order cannot be sustained at all.     

Read In re Marriage of Kacik, No. G041274 [HTML]

Read In re Marriage of Kacik, No. G041274 [PDF]

Appellate Information

Filed November 19, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Sills

Counsel
For Appellant:    Brandon & Yarc and Lisa E. Brandon

For Appellee:  N/A

A juvenile court's order requiring that the Alameda County Social Services Agency provide reunification services to a guardian to maintain the legal guardianship is affirmed as, under the plain meaning of the statute when considered within the context of juvenile dependency law, section 366.3(b)of the Welfare and Institutions Code provides the juvenile court with the power to order the social services agency to provide reunification services to a legal guardian when deciding whether it is in the best interests of the child to maintain the existing legal guardianship. 

Read In re Z.C., No. A123994 [PDF]

Read In re Z.C., No. A123994 [HTML]

Filed November 3, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Lambden

Counsel

For Appellant:  Andrew James Massey, Joanne Evelyn Morrison, Deputy County Counsel

For Appellee: Caroline Janes Todd

Petitioner's request for an extraordinary writ review of a juvenile court's order for a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing to consider modifying the permanent plan for two of his three children from long-term foster care to adoption is denied as petitioner did not have a right to a contested hearing.  

Read M.T. v. Sup. Ct. A125704 [PDF]

Read M.T. v. Sup. Ct. A125704 [HTML]

Filed October 30, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge McGuiness

Counsel

For Appellant:  Caroline J. Todd and James S. Donnelly

For Appellee: Dennis J. Herrera, City Attorney and Jennifer Williams, Deputy City Attorney; Gary Gonzalez;  Margaret A. Pendergast

Juvenile court's decision requiring the San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency to provide family maintenance services for plaintiff and her children is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the order requiring family maintenance services for father and the children is affirmed; but 2) the order for family maintenance services for mother is reversed and instead ordered that she be provided reasonable reunification services.     

Read In re Calvin P., No. D054830 [PDF]

Read In re Calvin P., No. D054830 [HTML]

Filed October 27, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge McDonald

Counsel

For Appellant: John J. Sansone  , County Counsel, John E. Philips, Chief Deputy County Counsel, Katherine R. Bird, Deputy County Counsel. 

For Appellee:  M. Elizabeth Handy

Juvenile court's findings and orders regarding defendant's two children is affirmed as there was sufficient evidence to support the jurisdictional findings and the orders removing the children from her custody.     

Read In re J.B., No. F056765 [PDF]

Read In re J.B., No. F056765 [HTML]

Filed October 26, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Kane

Counsel

For Appellant:  Neale B. Gold

For Appellee: John P. Doering, County Counsel, and Carrie M. Stephens, Deputy County Counsel

Dependency court's order appointing minor's aunt as the successor guardian and a separate order summarily denying father's subsequent Welfare & Institutions Code section 388 petition challenging the appointment is reversed as the failure to consider the provisions of section 366.3(f) deprived father of his rights to participate, to be considered as the guardian, and to be eligible to receive reunification services without the requirement that he file his own section 388 petition. 

Read In re R.N., No. B209458 [HTML]

Read In re R.N., No. B209458 [PDF]

Filed October 20, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Zelon

Counsel

For Appellant:  Joseph D. MacKenzie

For Appellee:  Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel and O. Raquel Ramirez, Deputy County Counsel

In a case brought by the Health and Human Services Agency to remove defendant's one-year-old son on the basis of her drug use, trial court's jurisdictional and dispositional orders are affirmed, but the matter is remanded to the juvenile court to vacate its finding that ICWA does not apply and to instruct the agency to complete ICWA inquiry and notice.   

Read In re Damian C., No. D054918

Filed October 8, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge McConnell

Counsel

For Appellant:  Sahyeh Samantha Fattahi

For Appelle:  John J. Sansone, County Counsel, John E. Philips, Chief Deputy County Counsel, and Lisa M. Maldonado, Deputy County Counsel

In dependency proceedings, trial court's jurisdictional findings and orders that pertained to plaintiff despite having ruled that he was not the presumed father, are affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the evidence established plaintiff's presumed father status; 2) the finding of jurisdiction under Welfare and Institutions Code, section 300(b) is reversed as there is no causal nexus between the court's findings of serious injury and the findings relating to plaintiff; 3) court's finding of jurisdiction under section 300(g) is affirmed as it is supported by plaintiff's failure to provide financial support for over a decade combined with his demonstrated lack of interest in the children's welfare; and 4) on remand, the trial court must make the inquiry concerning plaintiff's possible Indian ancestry required by ICWA and the California Rules of Court.     

Read In re J.O., No. B211535

Filed October 7, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Manella

Counsel

For Appellant:  Lori Fields, under appointment of the Court of Appeal

For Appelle:  Raymond G. Fortner, County Counsel, James M. Owens, Assistant County Counsel and Byron G. Shibata, Senior Associate County Counsel

Trial court's modification of the father's child support obligation is reversed and remanded as the court violated Family Code section 4057.5(a)(1) by considering the half of the community income attributable to the father's subsequent spouse.   

Read In re Marriage of Knowles, No. C057851

Filed October 6, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Nicholson

Counsel

For Appellant:  Bill J. Cook Law Corporation and Bill J. Cook

For Appelle:  Les Hait Law Corporation and Les Hait

Trial court's order dismissing plaintiff's petition to annul the marriage of her late father, comedian Richard Pryor, and her stepmother is affirmed as she lacks standing to petition to annul the marriage.     

Read Pryor v. Pryor, No. B207398

Filed September 30, 2009

Judges

Opinion by Judge Epstein

Counsel

For Appellant:  Holland & Knight, Bruce S. Ross, Linda Rottman, and Vivian L. Thoreen 

For Appelle:  Kibre & Horwitz, Howard L. Horwitz, and Eric G. Stockel