legal news


Register | Forgot Password

In re S.A.R. CA2/6
N.R. (father) appeals from orders of the juvenile court denying his Request to Change Court Order (section 388 petition) (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 388) without an evidentiary hearing, and terminating parental rights to his now one-year-old daughter, S.A.R. (§ 366.26.) Father contends the juvenile court erred in summarily denying his section 388 petition because it established a prima facie case of changed circumstances or new evidence. He also contends the juvenile court’s denial of the petition led to the premature termination of parental rights.
Celine G. (mother) separately appealed the trial court’s orders as to S.A.R. and S.A.R.’s half-sister, C.G. However, mother’s opening brief does not raise any issues as to either minor child. Instead, she joins in father’s arguments as to S.A.R. Accordingly, we construe mother’s appeal abandoned as to C.G. (See Reyes v. Kosha (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 451, 466, fn. 6

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