legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re J.R. CA6
Father (A.M.) appeals from the juvenile court’s jurisdictional and dispositional orders removing daughter (J.R., born 2006) from her caregiver’s care. In its orders, the juvenile court made two findings that father now contests on appeal: (1) there was clear and convincing evidence that placing daughter with father would be to her detriment and (2) the notices sent by the Department of Family and Children’s Services (Department) pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) were adequate. Father argues the juvenile court’s finding regarding daughter’s placement with him was superfluous and erroneous, because daughter was not in his care at the time the dependency proceedings were initiated and he did not request placement. He also claims the notices sent by the Department pursuant to ICWA were deficient. As we explain below, father forfeited his arguments about the juvenile court’s detriment finding for failing to object below. Additional

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