legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re Ryan A. CA2/5
These consolidated appeals involve two children, K.A. and Ryan A. (Ryan), who have the same father, defendant and appellant R.A. (Father). In prior opinions, we affirmed the juvenile court’s jurisdictional finding that both K.A. and Ryan are children described by Welfare and Institutions Code section 300. (In re K.A. (Jun. 22, 2017, B277442) [nonpub. opn.]; In re Ryan A. (Aug. 4, 2017, B277430) [nonpub. opn.]). When the juvenile court made its jurisdictional findings, it ordered informal supervision instead of declaring the children dependents of the court. Approximately six months after the jurisdictional hearing, however, the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (the Department or DCFS) filed petitions asserting the order for informal supervision had been ineffective in protecting the children’s welfare. The Department asked the juvenile court to declare the children dependents of the court and to impose new dispositional obligations on Father.

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