In Re Suzanna L.

Romelia W. v. Edward L.

Good Law
104 Cal. App. 4th 223·127 Cal. Rptr. 2d 860·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 5147·2002 Daily Journal DAR 13938·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11884
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 10, 2002E031146California5,062 words

Opinion

Opinion

Richli, J.

Edward L. and Romelia W. are the parents of Suzanna L. When they divorced, Romelia was given sole custody. Edward was allowed monitored visitation; however, he visited only sporadically for a year or so, and then not at all. Thereafter, Romelia married Alan W. In this action, the trial court granted Romelia’s petition to terminate Edward’s parental rights, based on abandonment, so Alan could adopt Suzanna.

Edward contends the trial court violated the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) because he, and hence Suzanna, were part Indian, yet proper notice was not given to their tribe. We agree. In the published portion of this opinion, we will hold that the ICWA’s notice provisions applied, even if, under the “existing Indian family doctrine,” its other provisions did not. On remand, the trial court must require proper notice. In the unpublished portion of this opinion, however, we find no other prejudicial error. Accordingly, if, after proper notice has been given, the trial court determines that the ICWA does not otherwise apply, it must reinstate its order terminating Edward’s parental rights.

I

Failure to Give Notice Pursuant to the Indian Child Welfare Act

Edward…

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.