legal news


Register | Forgot Password

R.M. v. Superior Court CA1/1
R.M. (mother) and L.O. (father) petition this court for extraordinary review of a juvenile court order setting a hearing to select a permanent plan for their four children, J.O., I.O., Li.O., and C.O., under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. Both parents contend the juvenile court erred by not making a finding regarding the applicability of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA; 25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) before setting the section 366.26 hearing. Father also asserts he did not receive adequate notice of status review hearing dates under section 366.21, and mother claims the juvenile court erred in (1) finding return of her youngest child would create a substantial risk of detriment to the child and (2) failing to find a substantial probability the child would be returned to her within 18 months. Real party in interest Contra Costa County Children & Family Services Bureau (Bureau) contends the ICWA issue is rendered moot by a juvenile court order issued after peti

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