In Re Daniel C.

Bad Law
141 Cal. App. 4th 1438·47 Cal. Rptr. 3d 137
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 10, 2006D047409California2,780 words

Opinion

Opinion

Linda Rehm, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Objectors and Appellants.

John J. Sansone, County Counsel, Susan Strom, Chief Deputy County Counsel, Gary C. Seiser, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Robert Wayne Gehring, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for minors.

McCONNELL, P.J.

Stephen L. and Alice L. (the L.'s), the dependent minors' de facto parents, appeal orders denying their posttermination Welfare and Institutions Code [1] section 388 petitions seeking return of the minors to their care. They contend the juvenile court abused its discretion by not granting a hearing, as they made a prima facie showing of changed circumstances and that the modification would be in the children's best interests. The San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency (the Agency) asserts we should dismiss the appeal as under section 366.28 the L.'s were required to proceed by way of a petition for writ relief. In accordance with our opinion in In re Shirley K. (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 65 , 43 Cal.Rptr.3d 897 ( Shirley K. ), we hold the court's ruling is appealable under section 395 and section 366.28 is inapplicable. On the merits, we find no abuse of…

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.