In re M.C. CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 29, 2022C094548California8,645 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

“On March 4, 2020, due to the outbreak of the COVID-19 virus, Governor Gavin Newsom declared a state of emergency. On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a pandemic. On March 19, 2020, Governor Newsom issued an executive order directing all Californians not providing essential services to stay at home.” (In re M.P. (2020) 52 Cal.App.5th 1013, 1016.) In recognition of the ongoing crisis, the Judicial Council promulgated an emergency rule meant to address visitation in juvenile dependency proceedings, which would expire 90 days after the lifting of the state of emergency related to COVID-19. (See In re M.P., at p. 1017; Cal. Rules of Court, appendix I, Emergency Rules Related to COVID-19, rule 6(d).) However, the COVID-19 state of emergency endured. In October 2020, as the pandemic raged on, the minor M.C. was born prematurely at 28 weeks gestation and admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). The medically fragile minor was initially diagnosed with chronic lung disease and ventricular septal defect (VSD), requiring that she live in a clean, smoke-free environment and that she be on oxygen support at all times. Two months…

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.