In re E.B. CA5

INTRODUCTION

Kristen B. (mother) and Eric M. (father) are the parents of son E.B. (born November 2019). Mother appeals from the juvenile court’s order terminating her parental rights pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. 1 She contends the Tulare County Health and Human Services Agency (the agency) and the juvenile court failed to comply with the inquiry requirements of the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA) and related California law because certain extended family members were not asked about E.B.’s possible Indian ancestry.2 Additionally, she argues the ICWA notice sent to the Cherokee tribes was deficient. The agency disagrees prejudicial error occurred. Consistent with our decisions in In re K.H. (2022) 84 Cal.App.5th 566 (K.H.) and In re E.C. (2022) 85 Cal.App.5th 123 (E.C.), we conclude “the [agency’s errors were] prejudicial because neither the agency nor the court gathered information sufficient to ensure a reliable finding that ICWA does not apply and remanding for an adequate inquiry in the first instance is the only meaningful way to safeguard the rights at issue. ([In re ]A.R. [(2021)] 11 Cal.5th [234,] 252–254 [(A.R.)].)…