legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re G.P. CA4/1
M.P. (Mother) appeals from two of the juvenile court's orders: (1) an order denying her motion under Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 (section 388 motion) to modify prior orders placing her daughters G.P. and Krista P. (together, the girls) in foster care and setting a permanency planning hearing, and (2) an order terminating her parental rights under section 366.26. Mother claims the juvenile court erred in: (1) failing to set an evidentiary hearing on her section 388 motion; (2) finding that G.P. was generally adoptable; (3) finding the beneficial relationship exception to termination of parental rights did not apply (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(B)(i)); and (4) finding the child-objection exception to termination of parental rights did not apply (§ 366.26, subd. (c)(1)(B)(ii)). Mother also asserts the girls maintain a bonded sibling relationship and must be adopted (or not) together. We conclude the juvenile court did not err on any asserted ground and accordingly, aff

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