legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re E.S. CA1/2
A.M. (Mother) appeals from an order terminating her parental rights to four children (Minors), who ranged in age from 2 to 8 at the time they were detained. The sole basis for her appeal is her argument that the Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services (Department) did not comply with the notice requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.). Separately, J.K. (Father) appeals from an order terminating his parental rights to B.K., the youngest of the Minors. Like Mother, he argues that the Department did not comply with ICWA. In addition he argues that the juvenile court violated his due process rights by treating him as B.K.’s alleged, rather than presumed, father, and by not appointing counsel for him throughout the entire proceeding. We conclude that only the ICWA claim has merit. Therefore, we will conditionally reverse and remand the matter for the limited purpose of compliance with ICWA.

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