legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re A.W.
C.W., mother of the minors, appeals from orders of the juvenile court terminating her parental rights. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26, 395.)[1] Appellant contends the record fails to show that appellant was informed and aware of her rights at the section 366.26 hearing and her submission on the issues was not, therefore, voluntary. Appellant further argues, and respondent concedes that a limited reversal for compliance with the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.) notice provisions is required. While finding no merit in appellant’s first contention, we accept respondent’s concession as to the second contention and reverse and remand the orders for compliance with the notice provisions of ICWA.
FACTS
In March 2008, the Shasta County Health and Human Services Agency (Agency) filed a petition to remove A.W., age seven; D.S., age three; and I.S., age 13 months from parental custody due to appellant’s drug issues. Mother successfully reunified and the first dependency was terminated in October 2009.

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