legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re B.R. CA2/7
Danielle V. appeals from the juvenile court’s August 9, 2017 jurisdiction findings and disposition order concerning her son, J.D., contending substantial evidence did not support the court’s finding it had no reason to know J.D. was an Indian child as defined by the Indian Child Welfare Act. Danielle argues the finding was based on “an apparently inaccurate assertion” by counsel for the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services at the jurisdiction hearing “that notices to Indian tribes had been mailed by first-class mail to tribes, and that no responses to those notices had been received for more than sixty days from the date of mailing.” Danielle argues there are no copies of any notices or mail receipts in the record to support assertion by counsel for the Department that the notices were mailed.

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