In re Edward C. CA1/5

DISCUSSION

Minor’s principal claim on appeal is that HSA should be jointly and severally liable for payment of the restitution orders issued to him. We decline to reach this issue, because although Minor concedes HSA is a public entity and is ordinarily immune from tort liability, Minor completely fails to discuss or analyze the question of the entity's immunity from Minor's claim. We therefore conclude he has forfeited the issue.

I. Minor Has Forfeited His Argument Because He Provides No Analysis and Scant

Legal Authority. Minor seeks to hold HSA jointly and severally liable for payment of the restitution orders issued in this case. Minor’s theory is that HSA is liable under section 730.7, subdivision (a), which provides that “a parent or guardian who has joint or sole legal and physical custody and control of the minor shall be rebuttably presumed to be jointly and severally liable with the minor in accordance with Sections 1714.1 and 1714.3 of the Civil Code for the amount of restitution, fines, and penalty assessments so ordered[.]” According to Minor, once he was placed in HSA’s care by the dependency court, HSA became his “guardian” for purposes of the…