legal news


Register | Forgot Password

G.D. v. Superior Court CA1/4
G.D. (Mother) and J.D. (Father; together, Parents), parents of seven-year-old B.D., brought separate writ petitions to try to avert a hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 that had been set for March 21, 2018. B.D. was taken from them in January 2016, at age five, because their home was dirty and unsanitary. Father contends the court’s findings were unsupported by substantial evidence, and by conflating a supplemental petition with an 18-month review, the court failed to make a jurisdictional finding on the supplemental petition, improperly proceeded to disposition on the supplemental petition, failed to give required notice of the disposition hearing, and failed to make necessary findings on disposition of the supplemental petition. Mother, too, contends necessary findings for the section 387 petition were omitted, the evidence was insufficient to support implied findings, and the court erred in combining an unnoticed disposition hearing with the jurisdicti

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