legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re J.T.
Defendant and appellant, K.T. (Mother), appeals from May 16, 2012, orders terminating parental rights to Mother’s fourth child, J.T., a girl born in July 2010, and placing J.T. for adoption. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.26.)[1] Mother does not challenge the propriety of the order terminating parental rights or placing J.T. for adoption. Instead, Mother claims that the juvenile court reversibly erred in failing to consider placing J.T. with J.T.’s maternal aunt, T.T. (Aunt), at the time of the May 16, 2012, section 366.26 hearing, or in June 2011 when J.T. needed a new placement. (§ 361.3.)
We reject Mother’s challenge to the order refusing to consider Aunt for placement or to place J.T. with Aunt because Mother has no standing to challenge that order. Mother does not claim that the failure to place J.T. with Aunt, at any time, had or would have had any bearing on the court’s decision to terminate parental rights. Thus, Mother is not aggrieved by the court’s refusal to consider Aunt for placement. (In re K.C. (2011) 52 Cal.4th 231, 238-239 (K.C.) [parent lacks standing to challenge placement order on appeal when parent does not claim the order had any bearing on court’s decision to terminate parental rights].)

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
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale