Ricardo

Ricardo v. v. SUPERIOR COURT

Good Law
147 Cal. App. 4th 419·147 Cal. App. 4th 424·54 Cal. Rptr. 3d 223
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 1, 2007B194013California818 words

Opinion

Opinion

Raymond G. Fortner, Jr., County Counsel, Larry Cory, Assistant County Counsel, and Judith A. Luby, Deputy County Counsel, for Real Party in Interest.

Children's Law Center of Los Angeles and Martha Matthews, Los Angeles, for Minor A.V.

CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION. [*]

ROTHSCHILD, J.

Ricardo V. (father), father of dependent daughter A.V., petitions for extraordinary writ review of orders setting a permanency planning hearing, terminating reunification services, and granting a Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) petition requesting that father's custody, pending the rehearing of a referee's order granting custody to father, be modified to allow monitored visits only. (Welf. & Inst.Code, §§ 366.22, 366.26, and 388; [1] Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.452 former rule 38.1 (hereafter Rule).) We deny the writ.

In the published portion of the opinion, we conclude that a referee's order is not automatically vacated when a party's request for rehearing before a judge is granted. Pursuant to section 250, that order remains in force until a new order is made after rehearing of the original order or pursuant to other procedures authorizing the court to…

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.