legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re Tiffany M.
Mother, father and the siblings (James and Stacey) appeal from an order of the juvenile court terminating parental rights for Tiffany and B. following hearings under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26.[1] Collectively, appellants contend there was no substantial evidence to support the juvenile courts finding that the parental relationship exception of subdivision (c)(1)(A), the child veto exception of subdivision (c)(1)(B) and the sibling relationship exception of subdivision (c)(1)(E) did not apply to the facts of this case. Mother separately argues that if a child over 12 is ambivalent about being adopted, the court must find that the child is presently not adoptable and refuse to terminate parental rights. Finding no error, Court affirm.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale