legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re D.V. CA4/1
Thomas E. Montgomery, County Counsel, John E. Philips, Chief Deputy County Counsel, and Patrice Plattner-Grainger, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
At a six-month status review hearing, the juvenile court terminated reunification services for N.R. (Mother) and O.V. (Father) and set a permanency planning hearing for their minor sons, D.V. and J.V., who had earlier been placed in foster care. Mother filed a petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 388, requesting that the court modify its order by placing the children with her or by reinstating her reunification services. The juvenile court found Mother met her burden of showing changed circumstances, but had not met her burden of showing modification was in the children's best interests. The court terminated parental rights and selected adoption as the children's permanent plan. The parents appeal only the juvenile court's denial of Mother's section 388 petition. We 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