legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re M.R
The juvenile court took dependency jurisdiction over six of I.H.’s (mother) children, her 11-year-old son Carlos R., 10-year-old daughter M.R., 9-year-old son W.M., 7-year-old son R.H., 5-year-old son David H., and 3-year-old son Robert H. (collectively the children), based on allegations under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (a), (b) and (g).[1] The juvenile court left the children in mother’s custody and ordered family maintenance services. Mother appeals, contending the juvenile court erred in finding jurisdiction under subdivisions (a), (b) and (g), because those findings are not supported by substantial evidence. We disagree and affirm.

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