In re C. W.
Craig W. (father) appeals from the juvenile courts jurisdictional and dispositional orders, contending (1) there is insufficient evidence fathers history of substance abuse has caused or would cause any harm to his daughter, C.W., (2) there is insufficient evidence supporting the courts decision to remove C., (3) the court erred in concluding he was not the presumed father of C., (4) the court erred in concluding he was not entitled to reunification services, and (5) the court erred in failing to ensure the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) complied with the notice requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA).[1] For reasons set forth below, we reject fathers first and second contentions, find his third and fourth contentions to be moot based on subsequent proceedings in the juvenile court, and agree with his fifth contention. Based on a failure to comply with the ICWA, as conceded by DCFS, Court reverse and remand the matter to the juvenile court with directions.
Comments on In re C. W.