legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re T.M. CA3
S.M. (mother) and R.R. (father), parents of the minors, appeal from the juvenile court’s order terminating parental rights. (Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 366.26 & 395; unless otherwise set forth, statutory section references that follow are to this code.)
The parents collectively contend (1) there was insufficient evidence to support the court’s finding that M.M. would likely be adopted; (2) the court erred in finding the beneficial parental relationship exception to adoption did not apply; (3) the court erred in finding the sibling bond exception to adoption did not apply; (4) the court abused its discretion in granting the motion to quash subpoenas for two of the minors, M.M. and A.M.; and (5) the court erred in denying mother’s request for a bonding study. Mother further asserts that if this court finds her request for a bonding study was untimely, then we should find her attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel.

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