Kern County Department of Human Services v. Mishiola S.

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 575·65 Cal. App. 4th 79·76 Cal. Rptr. 2d 121·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5002
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 24, 1998No. F029316California5,637 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Buckley, J.

Mishiola and Henry S. have four children, three of whom are the subjects of these proceedings: Henry, Jr. (bom May 10, 1991); Andrew (born Dec. 17, 1992); and Alicia (bom Mar. 7, 1994). Mishiola is three-eighths Paiute Indian and an enrolled member of the Paiute Tribe in Bishop, California. Henry S. is one-half Pima Indian and an enrolled member of the Gila River Indian Community in Sacaton, Arizona. The children are not eligible for membership in their mother’s tribe but are eligible for membership in their father’s tribe, and were enrolled in 1995.

Mishiola appeals from an order terminating her parental rights with respect to her three children. (Welf. & Inst. Code, 1 § 366.26.) Each is an “Indian child” as defined by the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978 ( 25 U.S.C.A. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA or the Act). However, the trial court found that neither Mishiola nor the children’s father, Henry S., had any significant relationship with the Indian community, and so refused to apply the ICWA to these proceedings in reliance upon a judicial interpretation of the Act recognizing what has become known as the “existing Indian family doctrine.” The validity of the doctrine has been…

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.