Case Summaries
Family Law
[03/05]
People v. Warwick
Conviction of defendant of child abuse and neglect and jury's true finding on the enhancement that she personally inflicted great bodily injury on her child is affirmed as, when she gave birth to her son in her bedroom and concealed the birth causing severe injuries, defendant inflicted great bodily injury on her child.
[03/05]
Doe v. S. Carolina Dep't of Soc. Servs.
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action brought by a minor child and her adoptive parents against defendant, an Adoption Specialist with the South Carolina Department of Social Services (SCDSS), alleging violations of their substantive due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment and state law claims against SCDSS under the South Carolina Tort Claims Act (SCTCA), judgment is affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded where: 1) when a state involuntarily removes a child from her home, thereby taking the child into its custody and care, the state has taken an affirmative act to restrain the child's liberty, triggering the protections of the Due Process Clause and imposing "some responsibility for the child's safety and general well being"; 2) because it would not have been apparent to a reasonable social worker in defendant's position that her actions violated the Fourteenth Amendment, she is entitled to qualified immunity; 3) prospective adoptive parents have no substantive due process right to the disclosure of a child's history of sexual abuse; and 4) district court's grant of defendants' motion for summary judgment on the state law claims for gross negligence against SCDSS is vacated and remanded for consideration of the applicability of section 15-78-60(25).
[03/04]
In re E.O.
Juvenile court's denial of a father's request for presumed father status is affirmed as the only provision of Family Code section 7611 that might possibly apply is subdivision (d) which states that a man is a presumed father if he "receives the child into his home and openly holds out the child as his natural child," and here, the father did not establish that he came within this or any of the categories set forth in Family Code section 7611.
[03/03]
Mendoza v. Ramos
In a father's petition to modify custody and support orders of his four children, the court's judgment is affirmed where: 1) trial court's refusal to attribute income because the mother was receiving CalWORKs was proper; and 2) the father's rights were not violated as neither parties requested testimony.
[02/26]
In Re Marriage of MacManus
In marital dissolution proceedings, trial court's order reallocating back child support to back spousal support is affirmed as, the order was not an abuse given the trial court's broad discretion to consider the "big picture" concerning the parties' assets and income available for support in light of the marriage standard of living.
[02/26]
In re Marcos G.
In dependency proceedings, an order denying a father's 388 petition and terminating his parental rights is affirmed where: 1) although there was a failure to follow certain notice provisions, the error was not prejudicial; and 2) father's section 388 petition was not an abuse of discretion.
[02/23]
Murray v. Lene
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action alleging, inter alia, an unlawful seizure, dismissal of the complaint is affirmed in part where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff's remaining state law claims; 2) plaintiff's conspiracy claim failed because the complaint failed to allege a "meeting of the minds" among the alleged conspirators; and 3) recklessness could be inferred from the omission of information from an affidavit only when the material omitted would have been clearly critical to the finding of probable cause.
[02/23]
In re W.B.
Juvenile court's order removing a minor from his mother's custody and ordering him placed in a foster home, group home, relative home, county or private facility is affirmed as, because the ICWA excludes delinquencies from its notice requirements, any attempts by the State of California to expand ICWA's application to delinquencies is unauthorized under federal preemption doctrine.
[02/22]
In re Marriage of Sonne
In a marital dissolution action involving the proper apportionment of the service credit from the parties' marriage, a member of the California Public Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS), judgment finding that the community was entitled to 70.83% of the service credit is reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the community had a claim only on the annuity component relating to the time period of the husband-Dalia marriage, and was entitled only to a pro tanto share of that portion of husband's retirement allowance ; and 2) both the trial court and the court of appeal made an error of law in assuming that husband's redeposit of member contributions with community funds entitled the community to a corresponding fraction of the entire retirement allowance attributable to the years of the Husband-Dalia marriage.
[02/22]
In re Christopher C.
Juvenile court's decision declaring six of seven children to be placed in the care of DCFS, and an order for various physical and mental treatment for the children, are affirmed where: 1) father forfeited his claim that the petition fails to state a cause of action; and 2) the evidence is sufficient to sustain the juvenile court's jurisdictional findings.
[02/18]
Adar v. Smith
In an action brought by same-sex, unmarried, adoptive parents in New York seeking injunction action against defendant, the Louisiana State Registrar, to compel her to issue a new original birth certificate for an infant born in Louisiana, summary judgment for plaintiffs is affirmed where: 1) Louisiana owed full faith and credit to a prior New York adoption decree; and 2) full faith and credit required Louisiana, under the plain language of its own statute and under the constitutional requirement of "evenhanded" enforcement of that judgment, to issue a certificate for the infant that listed both adoptive parents as his parents.
[02/17]
V.S. v. Muhammad
In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action based on the termination of plaintiff's parental rights due to an allegedly false diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome, a denial of summary judgment based on qualified immunity is reversed where: 1) even if defendant-city employees had been aware of a physician's alleged reputation for overdiagnosing child abuse, it still would not have been unreasonable for them to rely on his diagnosis of plaintiff's child in these circumstances; and 2) city defendants were absolutely immune from a claim of abuse of process.
More...
|
