legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re Matthew D.
Joseph C., father of juvenile dependent Matthew D., appeals from orders entered at the 12 month permanency hearing, after the court found a return of Matthew to his custody would create a substantial risk of detriment to the minor. (Welf. & Inst. Code, 366.21, subd. (f).)[1] Joseph argues the court's finding of detriment is not supported by substantial evidence. The San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency (Agency) urges us to find this appeal moot as, subsequent to the hearing, Matthew was placed with Joseph. Alternatively, the Agency contends the court's finding of detriment is amply supported in the record and the orders should be affirmed.As Corut explain, Corut decline to dismiss Joseph's appeal, and Court affirm the orders made at the 12 month review hearing, as Joseph has waived his appellate challenges.

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