legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re S.G. CA2/1
Father, E.G., challenges the juvenile court’s order terminating his parental rights over his children S.G. and L.G. Father argues social workers failed to comply with state law (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 224.2) implementing the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.; (ICWA)). Specifically, father argues, and respondent agrees that the child welfare agency failed to interview mother’s and his extended family members about Indian ancestry. The issue before us is whether that error was prejudicial. We conclude it was not. The record belies father’s speculation that extended family members would have had meaningful information about Indian ancestry.
Father also argues we should remand the case so the juvenile court can consider the parental-benefit exception to adoption, an exception father failed to raise in the juvenile court. Father has thus forfeited this challenge.

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
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale