In re Sebastian H. CA2/1

California Court of Appeal Mar 1, 2024 No. B325717Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court dismissed the parents' appeals as moot because the juvenile court had terminated dependency jurisdiction and the parents failed to demonstrate any specific legal or practical consequences from the challenged jurisdictional finding that would warrant discretionary review.

Issues

Whether the parents' challenge to a single jurisdictional finding is justiciable when other jurisdictional findings remain unchallenged.
Whether the potential for future inclusion in the Child Abuse Central Index (CACI) constitutes a specific legal consequence sufficient to avoid mootness.
Whether the court should exercise its discretion to review the merits of a moot dependency appeal.

Disposition. dismissed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“we agree the appeals are moot, and we decline to exercise our discretion to consider the appeals on the merits.”

“Mother and Father’s speculative claim about possible inclusion in CACI is similarly insufficient to avoid mootness or cause us to exercise our discretion to review the merits of these moot appeals.”

“The appeals are dismissed.”

Filed 3/1/24 In re Sebastian H. CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

In re SEBASTIAN H. et al., B325717 Persons Coming Under the (Los Angeles County Juvenile Court Law. Super. Ct. No. 22CCJP03677)

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

IRENE M. et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

APPEALS from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Charles Q. Clay III, Judge. Appeals dismissed.

Lauren K. Johnson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Irene M. Suzanne M. Nicholson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Daniel H. Dawyn Harrison, County Counsel, Kim Nemoy, Assistant County Counsel, and Kimberly Roura, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. _______________________________ 1 In this dependency case (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 300 et seq.), Irene M. (Mother) and Daniel H. (Father) appeal from the juvenile court’s disposition order, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting one of several jurisdictional findings against them. While their appeals were pending, the juvenile court terminated dependency jurisdiction and granted sole physical custody of their two children to Mother, with shared legal custody for both parents. The Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) moved to dismiss the appeals as moot. For the reasons explained below, we agree the appeals are moot, and we decline to exercise our discretion to consider the appeals on the merits. BACKGROUND I. Jurisdiction and Disposition In March 2022, DCFS received a referral alleging domestic violence between Mother and Father. DCFS found the allegations against Mother and Father to be substantiated on the bases of emotional abuse and general neglect of their two children, Sebastian (then six years old) and Santiago (then three

In re Sebastian H. CA2/1

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

CHANEY, J.

ROTHSCHILD, P. J.

BENDIX, J.

AI Brief