legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re G.M. CA4/3
H.M. (Mother) appeals from an order terminating her parental rights over
her son, now 16-year-old G.M. She contends the juvenile court erred by denying her
visitation before the permanency hearing and by determining that the Indian Child
Welfare Act of 1978 (ICWA; 25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) did not apply.
We affirm. Mother’s submission in the juvenile court on the visitation
order and failure to object to it when it was made or at any time leading up to or during
the permanency hearing, resulted in a forfeiture, preventing Mother from raising that
issue on appeal. There is no evidence the juvenile court erred in finding ICWA
inapplicable to G.M.

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