San Diego County Health & Human Services Agency v. Esther M.

Good Law
166 Cal. App. 4th 44
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 20, 2008No. D052400California4,841 words

Opinion

concurrence Opinion

Huffman, J.

I concur in the holding and the reasoning in the majority opinion except for part IV. As to part IV, I concur only in the result.

lead Opinion

Haller, J.

The San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency (Agency) and the minor children, Adrianna P., M.G., Maurice G., Jr., and Q.G. (collectively, the children) appeal from orders directing the Agency to provide reunification services to Adrianna’s presumed father, Andrew P, and to Maurice G., the presumed father of M.G., Maurice G., Jr., and Q.G.

Today we decide two factually related cases that concern the grant and denial of family reunification services to the parents of the four dependent children. In the related nonpublished case, In re Adrianna P. (Aug. 12, 2008, D052314), we discuss Esther’s appeal from orders removing the children from her custody and denying her reunification services. Here we focus on appellants’ challenges to orders directing the Agency to provide reunification services to Andrew and Maurice. To summarize our holdings and conclusions in their proper context, we briefly note the circumstances that gave rise to the issues presented in this appeal.

From May 2002 to June 2007, Adrianna and M.G. (together, girls) were dependents of the juvenile court due to Esther’s physical abuse of Adrianna and domestic violence between Esther and Maurice.…

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.