E.G.

Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. E.G.

Good Law
100 Cal. Rptr. 3d 524·178 Cal. App. 4th 557·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 1687
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 20, 2009No. B209458California3,177 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Zelon, J.

Minor R.N.’s grandparents were appointed her guardians in 1996. After the death of both grandparents, R.N.’s aunt D. filed a Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 1 petition seeking to be appointed her guardian. Father E.G. (Father) appeals the dependency court’s order appointing D. as R.N.’s guardian, and a separate order summarily denying his subsequent section 388 petition challenging D.’s appointment. Father contends that under section 366.3, he was entitled to be considered as R.N.’s guardian and to be given reunification services, and that the dependency court erred in summarily denying his separate section 388 petition to terminate R.N.’s guardianship and give custody of R.N. to him. We reverse, because the failure to consider the provisions of section 366.3 deprived Father of his rights.

*560 FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

1. Proceedings Held in 1994-1996

R.N. was bom in April 1994 with a positive toxicology screen for cocaine. The Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (the Department) detained her and placed her with her paternal grandparents, R.G. and A.G. Mother (Mother) had a long history of using crack cocaine, and…

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.