In re Adrian W. CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 16, 2013D063431California369 words

Opinion

Opinion

Haller, J.

DISCUSSION

Victoria contends her appeal is not moot because the juvenile court continues to have

the authority to provide reunification services to her. She points out that she may file a section

388 petition requesting additional reunification services. In addition, if Adrian's placement

with his father is not successful, the court may consider placing Adrian with her with

additional services.

The Agency, joined by minor's counsel, argue that the child's placement with his father

converted the proceedings from a family reunification case to a family maintenance case, and

the issue of whether the juvenile court erred when it denied additional reunification services to

Victoria is now moot.

An appeal becomes moot when, through no fault of the respondent, the occurrence of an

event renders it impossible for the appellate court to grant the appellant effective relief. (In re

We grant the Agency's request for judicial notice of the minute order dated July 29, 2013, at which the juvenile court continued Adrian's placement with his father, terminated its jurisdiction and issued family court custody and visitation orders. That order will be…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.