legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re Jacob C.
Bryan P. appeals from termination of his parental rights as to his son, Jacob C. He contends he was treated as a presumed father by the juvenile court and therefore should be accorded that status on appeal. Status as a presumed father is critical to Bryans argument that the order terminating his parental rights violated his right to due process, because there were neither findings of detriment nor unfitness as to him. Alternatively, he argues he was entitled to status as a nonoffending noncustodial parent whose rights could not be terminated without a finding of unfitness under Welfare and Institutions Code section 361.2.[1] Bryan also argues the juvenile court erred by failing to exercise its discretion to determine whether placement of Jacob with paternal relatives was appropriate. Court find no basis to infer that Bryan was treated as a presumed father by the juvenile court, a status for which he did not qualify. We also conclude he was not entitled to custody under section 361.2. Court affirm the order terminating parental rights. Bryan lacks standing to challenge the juvenile courts order placing Jacob in a foster home rather than with Sophie P. Alternatively, Court find no error in that decision on its merits.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale