Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family v. Matthew M.

Bad Law
119 Cal. Rptr. 3d 153·190 Cal. App. 4th 1154·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 2084
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 17, 2010No. B221851California2,505 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Rothschild, J.

Matthew M. (father), the biological father of X.S., appeals from the judgment entered after the juvenile court declared his son a dependent child of the court based in part on a finding against father under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b), 1 and ordered the child placed with his maternal grandmother. Because no substantial evidence supports the section 300, subdivision (b), finding against father, we reverse the judgment as to him and remand the matter for the juvenile court to reconsider its disposition orders.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1. The Detention and the Section 300 Petition

On August 10, 2009, when X.S. was about four months old, the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) received a referral alleging that the child’s mother, who lived with the maternal grandmother, had a physical altercation with the maternal grandmother in the child’s presence. As a result, mother, then a minor, was placed in a juvenile detention center, and the child was placed in foster care. Mother reported to DCFS that father, then 20 years old, was the child’s father, but father denied paternity.

DCFS filed a petition…

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.