legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re J.B. CA2/4

nhaleem's Membership Status

Registration Date: Aug 17, 2021
Usergroup: Administrator
Listings Submitted: 0 listings
Total Comments: 0 (0 per day)
Last seen: 08:17:2021 - 16:49:06

Biographical Information

Contact Information

Submission History

Most recent listings:
In re Skyla G. CA2/1
P. v. Ariaz CA2/7
In re Marcus P. CA2/7
P. v. Johnson CA2/2
P. v. Escobar-Lopez CA1/4

Find all listings submitted by nhaleem
In re J.B. CA2/4
By
05:09:2022

Filed 3/15/22 In re J.B. CA2/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(a). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115(a).

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

In re J.B., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

B314320

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

A.B.,

Defendant and Appellant.

Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. 18LJJP00255

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Michael C. Kelley, Judge. Affirmed.

Jacob I. Olson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Rodrigo A. Castro-Silva, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel, Veronica Randazzo, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Ashley B. (mother) appeals from the juvenile court's order terminating her parental rights to her child J.B. Mother does not challenge the juvenile court's substantive findings. Instead, mother's sole contention on appeal was that the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (Department) failed to satisfy its duty of initial inquiry under the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA). Specifically, mother contended the Department did not make meaningful efforts to locate and interview her biological mother. We use the past tense because mother filed a concession letter instead of a reply brief. In her letter, she concedes the Department contacted her biological mother and thereby complied with its duty of initial inquiry under ICWA.

DISPOSITION

We therefore affirm the juvenile court's order terminating mother's parental rights to J.B.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

CURREY, J.

We concur:

WILLHITE, Acting P.J.

COLLINS, J.





Description Ashley B. (mother) appeals from the juvenile court's order terminating her parental rights to her child J.B. Mother does not challenge the juvenile court's substantive findings. Instead, mother's sole contention on appeal was that the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (Department) failed to satisfy its duty of initial inquiry under the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA). Specifically, mother contended the Department did not make meaningful efforts to locate and interview her biological mother. We use the past tense because mother filed a concession letter instead of a reply brief. In her letter, she concedes the Department contacted her biological mother and thereby complied with its duty of initial inquiry under ICWA.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.
Views 3 views. Averaging 3 views per day.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale