In re M.Z. CA2/4

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 2026B344543California2,978 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

N.W. (mother) appeals the jurisdictional findings made by the juvenile court under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300,1 arguing they are not supported by substantial evidence. Mother also challenges the juvenile court’s dispositional order removing her child (M.Z.) from her care. We affirm, concluding that the juvenile court’s jurisdictional findings and removal order are supported by substantial evidence. As the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history of the case, we do not restate those details in full here. Below, we discuss only the facts and history as needed to resolve—and provide context for—the issues presented on appeal.

DISCUSSION

I. Justiciability

The original section 300 petition set forth counts against M.Z.’s mother and father. The juvenile court sustained jurisdiction on all counts against both parents. Only mother appealed; father is not a party to this appeal. Respondent, the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (Department), argues mother’s appeal is non-justiciable, correctly pointing out that where there is an uncontested basis for jurisdiction under section 300, we need not consider whether…

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.