In re W.B

Filed 3/6/06 In re W.B. CA6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

The mother in this case appeals from a juvenile dependency court order granting a petition by the County of Santa Clara (County) for disclosure of juvenile dependency records for use in a pending federal action in which the County is a defendant. She contends that the juvenile court abused its discretion by granting the petition on an insufficient factual showing and without adequate protective orders. The County's petition was in part responsive to a declaration filed by the mother in the federal action, in which she asserted misconduct on the part of County social workers. Because it is unclear from the record whether the juvenile court had this declaration before it when it ruled on the petition, we will reverse the order and remand the matter for further proceedings.

BACKGROUND

This dependency began in 1998 when all four of the mother's children were removed from her care. Petitions under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300 were sustained as to all four children. Subsequently, the mother's parental rights as to the youngest child were terminated and he was adopted out. Two of the siblings were later returned home to the mother with a plan of family maintenance. And a guardianship has been established for one child with the family where she was initially placed in 1998.

The matter before us arises from a pending civil rights action filed in federal district court (Wittman v. Saenz, et al., case No. C-02-2893 SI). The Santa Clara County Department of Family and Children's Services (Department) is a defendant in that action. A claim in the federal action is that the Department violated the First Amendment rights of association of parents in dependency actions by having a policy of forcing reunifying parents to separate from their significant others. The mother is not a plaintiff in the federal action; however, she apparently filed a sworn declaration in that action, in which she asserted that, during the time her children were dependents of the court, two different social workers with the Department had told her that she could not associate with the two significant men in her life if she wanted to have her children returned to her.

On June 30, 2005, Deputy County Counsel Michael Rossi, who was representing the County in the federal action, brought this petition in juvenile court. The petition stated that the County was a defendant in a federal civil rights action in federal district court. In connection with the federal action, the petition sought access to â€