In re Ryan M. CA2/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 19, 2021B311047California1,720 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lavin, J.

INTRODUCTION

Larry M. (father) appeals from orders entered after the dependency court terminated jurisdiction over his children. The exit orders awarded D.K. (mother) sole physical custody and allowed father only monitored visitation.1 Father contends these orders violated his right to due process of law because they were entered by a judge who had not previously presided over the case and had failed to review the case file. We conclude the court abused its discretion and reverse.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND3

Father and mother are the parents of Aaron M. (born 2014) and Ryan M. (born 2012). Father and mother are not in a relationship, but before the dependency proceedings in this case, they shared legal and physical custody of the children. 1. Initiation of Dependency Proceedings On October 1, 2019, the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services (Department) received a report that six-year-old Ryan had been physically abused by his father’s

1Father does not challenge the termination of dependency jurisdiction or the court’s order granting him joint legal custody. Mother is not a party to this appeal. Accordingly, we do not reach the constitutional issue.…

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.