CA Unpub Decisions

The trial court in this custody and parentage action ordered respondent Sharon D. (mother) to pay some, but not all, of the attorney’s fees incurred by appellant Martin P. (father) pursuant to Family Code sections 7605 and 7640. The court also denied father’s request for fee sanctions under section 271.
Father challenges both rulings on appeal, and also challenges the trial court’s decision to admit the testimony by mother’s expert on the reasonableness of father’s attorney’s fees. For the reasons expressed below, we affirm the judgment.

Appellant Jessica C. was the legal guardian of minors A.C. and C.C. The Fresno County Department of Social Services (department) filed a Welfare and Institutions Code section 387 petition seeking to terminate the guardianship and place the minors in foster care. After the filing of the section 387 petition, Jessica filed a section 388 petition seeking to terminate the guardianship. Jessica contends it was error for the juvenile court to issue findings and an order on the section 387 petition and contends the juvenile court should have proceeded solely on the section 388 petition. She asks the findings and order on the section 387 petition be reversed. We affirm.

Minor J.S. contends on appeal that the juvenile court abused its discretion when it committed him to the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ). We affirm.

Appellant Gary Lynn Mainard stands convicted of carrying a dirk or dagger, misdemeanor evading a peace officer, and misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance. Mainard contends the trial court erred in: (1) instructing the jury; and (2) in allowing a prior conviction to be used for impeachment purposes. We affirm.

Plaintiff is appealing from a judgment entered against him after the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants. Plaintiff’s brief asserts he was assaulted by the staff of the Fresno County Jail while he was incarcerated there, and was denied medical treatment for his resulting injuries. He seems to argue that he has a valid claim against defendants for violation of his civil rights (42 U.S.C.S., § 1983) and denial of medical care (Gov. Code, §§ 844.6, 845.6). Because he has not demonstrated any prejudicial error in the judgment, we will affirm.

Appellant Caleb Ryan Adkins’s sole contention on appeal is that the prosecutor committed misconduct by commenting on his failure to testify, in violation of Griffin v. California (1965) 380 U.S. 609 (Griffin). Adkins contends his convictions for forcible oral copulation and attempted forcible rape must be reversed. We affirm.

Appellant Jesus Ruiz Vasquez was convicted of willful harm or injury to a child in violation of Penal Code section 273a, subdivision (a) (count 1), and assault with a deadly weapon or force likely to produce great bodily injury in violation of section 245, subdivision (a)(1) (count 2). The court found true appellant personally inflicted great bodily injury on a child under the age of five in the commission of a felony or attempted felony, and each count was enhanced pursuant to section 12022.7, subdivision (d). Finally, the court found appellant had served four prior prison terms pursuant to section 667.5, subdivision (b).

Defendant and appellant S.G. is the mother of the two children at issue in this dependency appeal. She challenges the juvenile court’s orders granting sole legal and physical custody of the children to their previously noncustodial father, terminating dependency jurisdiction over the children, and setting the terms of mother’s visitation. She contends that the juvenile court erred by (1) placing the children with father; (2) having placed the children with father, failing to retain jurisdiction to supervise the placement under a family maintenance plan; and (3) setting terms of visitation for mother that are unreasonable and not in the best interests of the children. We affirm the judgment.

Jeffrey Steven McCreary appeals orders denying his petitions for resentencing of felonies to misdemeanors under Penal Code section 1170.18. The district attorney stated McCreary was not eligible for relief because of his subsequent conviction for first degree murder. The trial court denied his petitions for resentencing. McCreary is serving a term of 25 years to life for murder.
Appointed appellate counsel filed a brief presenting no argument for reversal but inviting this court to review the record for error in accordance with People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). After having independently reviewed the entire record for error, as required by Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders) and Wende, we affirm.

Appointed counsel for defendant Travis Ray Thompson filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment.

Rolando G., father of 14-year-old Julia G. (father), appeals from the juvenile court’s orders denying his request to place Julia in his home and requiring him to participate in parenting classes and individual counseling. We reverse the order denying placement of Julia with father and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

This case returns to us for a second time. In our prior opinion (case no. B279293), we rejected challenges by Lucille C., legal guardian and maternal great grandmother of A.M., to the juvenile court’s jurisdictional findings under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300 and dispositional orders. In this appeal, legal guardian challenges the juvenile court’s order terminating her family reunification services. We affirm.

Plaintiffs Patricia Porter, through her successor-in-interest Linda Solis, and Solis, individually (collectively, plaintiffs) sued AG Arcadia, LLC, doing business as Country Villa Huntington Drive Healthcare Center (Country Villa), AG Facilities Operations, LLC (AG Facilities), and Country Villa Service Corp. dba Country Villa Health Services (Service Corp.) (collectively, defendants) for elder abuse under Welfare and Institutions Code section 15657, a provision of the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act (Elder Abuse Act), violation of the Patient’s Bill of Rights (Health & Safety Code, § 1430, subd. (b)), negligence, willful misconduct, and wrongful death.

Plaintiff Chen Chung Wei, as trustee of the Huang 2013 Family Trust dated June 19, 2013 (Huang Trust), appeals from an order granting attorney fees to defendants. Plaintiff sued defendants Culture Escrow, Inc. and Kevin Hsu (collectively defendants) for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty related to a real estate transaction between plaintiff’s mother Huang Miao Wei (Huang) and his stepfather Wen Tu Chen (Wen).
Judgment was entered for defendants, who then moved for attorney fees. The trial court awarded attorney fees to defendants under a provision in the transaction’s escrow instructions. Plaintiff contends the attorney fees provision in the escrow instructions is an indemnity provision, not a prevailing party attorney fees provision, and as such does not support the award of attorney fees to defendants. We affirm.