In Re Joshua C.

California Court of Appeal May 11, 1994 No. C016398Published

Before: Raye

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The dismissal of a dependency action at the dispositional hearing does not render an appeal moot when the jurisdictional findings serve as the basis for continuing custody and visitation orders.

Issues

Does the dismissal of a dependency action render an appeal of the underlying jurisdictional findings moot?
Can a parent challenge jurisdictional findings in a dependency case after the juvenile court has terminated jurisdiction and issued custody and visitation orders?

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“In this appeal we address the question of whether dismissal of a dependency action at the dispositional hearing renders the case moot, preventing review of findings upon which continuing orders for custody and visitation are based.”

“We conclude it does not.”

“The fact that the dependency action has been dismissed should not preclude review of a significant basis for the assertion of jurisdiction where exercise of that jurisdiction has resulted in orders which continue to adversely affect appellant.”

24 Cal.App.4th 1544 (1994) 30 Cal. Rptr.2d 10 In re JOSHUA C. et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law.

SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Plaintiff and Respondent,

WAYNE C., Defendant and Appellant.

Docket No. C016398. Court of Appeals of California, Third District.

May 11, 1994. [1545] COUNSEL

Theodore S. Goodwin for Defendant and Appellant.

John S. Cheadle, County Counsel, Steven B. Bassoff and Carol Dahle Stiles, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

[Opinion certified for partial publication.[*]]

[1546] OPINION

RAYE, J.

In this appeal we address the question of whether dismissal of a dependency action at the dispositional hearing renders the case moot, preventing review of findings upon which continuing orders for custody and visitation are based. We conclude it does not.

Wayne C., the minors' father, appeals from juvenile court orders following a dispositional hearing establishing custody and visitation and terminating the dependency case. The dependency petitions alleged appellant sexually abused his daughter, Stacey (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300, subd. (d)), and that her twin brother, Joshua, was at substantial risk of suffering similar harm. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300, subds. (d), (j).)

Appellant contends there was insufficient evidence to support the jurisdictional findings as to Joshua and the juvenile court erred by refusing to grant certain discovery orders thereby denying him due process. Respondent contends these issues cannot be reached as dismissal of the dependency action rendered the appeal moot.

In Re Joshua C.

AI Brief

RAYE, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

FACTS

DISCUSSION

DISPOSITION

NOTES

AI Brief