legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re Jade B.
Appellant William B. (Father) appeals from the juvenile court’s orders denying his motions to dismiss dependency petitions filed pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 300,[1] a jurisdiction order sustaining a dependency petition under section 300, subdivision (b), and a disposition order declaring the child Jade B. a dependent of the court and terminating jurisdiction with a family law order giving Rebecca R. (Mother) sole physical and legal custody and requiring that Father not contact Jade.
We affirm. Both the initial and the amended dependency petitions stated a basis for jurisdiction under section 300, subdivision (b) on the basis of Father’s lying about and exaggerating Jade’s medical condition and his harassment of medical professionals. Further, substantial evidence supported jurisdiction, as the evidence showed his conduct created a risk of harm to Jade. Finally, the juvenile court acted within its discretion in terminating jurisdiction with a no-contact order, as Father’s conduct demonstrated that less restrictive alternatives would not be effective to protect Jade.

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
    © 2026 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2026 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale