legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re B.L. CA4/2
Defendant and appellant, J.L. (father), challenges the juvenile court’s order terminating his visitation with his children, B.L., L.L., and J.L., Jr. At the time the court made this order, this case was well beyond the reunification stage, and the children were in a planned permanent living arrangement (PPLA) with their foster mother. Father contends the court erred because it based its order solely on the children’s wishes, and substantial evidence did not otherwise support the court’s order. We do not agree with father’s assertion that the court based its decision solely on the children’s wishes and did not exercise its own judgment. The record contains ample evidence that continued visitation with father would have been detrimental to the children’s physical or emotional well-being. We therefore 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
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale