legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re Kendall J. CA2/1

mk's Membership Status

Registration Date: May 18, 2017
Usergroup: Administrator
Listings Submitted: 0 listings
Total Comments: 0 (0 per day)
Last seen: 05:23:2018 - 13:04:09

Biographical Information

Contact Information

Submission History

Most recent listings:
P. v. Mendieta CA4/1
Asselin-Normand v. America Best Value Inn CA3
In re C.B. CA3
P. v. Bamford CA3
P. v. Jones CA3

Find all listings submitted by mk
In re Kendall J. CA2/1
By
11:22:2017

Filed 9/27/17 In re Kendall J. CA2/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

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

B279982

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. DK06983)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

MARTIN D.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Daniel Zeke Zeidler, Judge. Dismissed.

Emery El Habiby, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Lori Siegel, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Minor.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

——————————

Martin D. raises only one issue on appeal: the trial court’s October 21, 2016 order denying his request for presumed father status under Family Code section 7611, subdivision (d). We granted Kendall J.’s request for judicial notice of a June 16, 2017 subsequent order (while this appeal was pending) in which the trial court found that Martin D. was Kendall J.’s presumed father. Because Martin D. now has presumed father status, his appeal is moot.

“ ‘An appeal becomes moot when, through no fault of the respondent, the occurrence of an event renders it impossible for the appellate court to grant the appellant effective relief.’ ” (In re Anna S . (2010) 180 Cal.App.4th 1489, 1498.)

In light of the June 16, 2017 minute order, Martin D.’s challenge to the denial of presumed father status no longer presents a live, justiciable controversy, as Martin D. has been declared Kendall J.’s presumed father. We therefore do not reach the merits, and dismiss the appeal as moot.

DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

JOHNSON, J.

We concur:

CHANEY, Acting P. J.

LUI, J.





Description Martin D. raises only one issue on appeal: the trial court’s October 21, 2016 order denying his request for presumed father status under Family Code section 7611, subdivision (d). We granted Kendall J.’s request for judicial notice of a June 16, 2017 subsequent order (while this appeal was pending) in which the trial court found that Martin D. was Kendall J.’s presumed father. Because Martin D. now has presumed father status, his appeal is moot.
“ ‘An appeal becomes moot when, through no fault of the respondent, the occurrence of an event renders it impossible for the appellate court to grant the appellant effective relief.’ ” (In re Anna S . (2010) 180 Cal.App.4th 1489, 1498.)
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.
Views 6 views. Averaging 6 views per day.

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

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale