legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re B.C.
B.C. (the minor) is the child at issue in this juvenile dependency case. She has filed a petition for extraordinary writ seeking review of the juvenile court’s orders terminating reunification services for her mother, E.C. (Mother), and setting a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26[1] permanency planning hearing. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 5.695(h)(15).[2])
In her petition, the minor claims: (1) the juvenile court failed to make the statutorily required findings to support denial of reunification services, and the disposition report failed to provide sufficient information upon which the court could make appropriate findings; (2) negligence cannot support the denial of reunification services based upon infliction of severe sexual abuse pursuant to section 361.5, subdivision (b)(6); and (3) the juvenile court failed to make a finding that denial of reunification services would be in the minor’s best interest.
Mother has filed a letter indicating she joins in the minor’s challenge to the juvenile court’s orders. For the reasons stated below, we will deny the petition for writ of mandate.

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