Holt

Holt v. Superior Court

Good Law
186 Cal. App. 2d 524·1960 Cal. App. LEXIS 1662·9 Cal. Rptr. 353
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 21, 1960Civ. 19557California952 words

Opinion

Opinion

Shoemaker, J.

Petitioner is the mother of three minor children. At the instigation of a probation officer three proceedings are pending in respondent court to declare the three children wards of that court.

Petitioner, prior to hearings upon the proceedings below, moved in respondent court to inspect a certain probationary report submitted by the probation officer and read by the judge below. There is a conflict in the record as to whether a report has ever been filed. Petitioner contends that filing was made. Respondents deny such filing. The motion was denied. That denial forms the basis for this petition for writ of mandate.

The questions to be decided on this application are:

Petitioner contends that as a parent of the children sought to be made wards of the court she has a statutory right to inspect the report under Welfare & Institutions Code, section 639.

Petitioner’s contention seems amply justified by the language of the statute:

This right to inspect was referred to in the case of In re Florance, 47 Cal.2d 25, 28 [ 300 P.2d 825 ], where the court stated: “. . . [T]his report is open to inspection by the parties.” “Such court [juvenile] operates under special powers in conformity…

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.