legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re S.S. CA4/2
H.S. (father) appeals from a juvenile court’s order at the 18-month permanency review hearing (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 366.22) terminating his reunification services and setting a hearing under section 366.26 to consider the implementation of a permanent plan regarding his daughter, S.S. (the child). Father contends that the court failed to make the necessary finding that return of the child to his custody would create a substantial risk of detriment to her well-being, and that there was insufficient evidence to support a detriment finding. We affirm.

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