Alameda County Social Services Agency v. A.A.
245 Cal. App. 4th 53
Cal. Ct. App.2016Background
- Mother and baby N.S. were involved in dependency proceedings after Mother and the father were arrested twice for operating a marijuana grow house where unsafe chemicals and wiring were found; N.S. had no physical injuries.
- The Agency filed a section 300 petition alleging risk of harm (subd. (b)) and abandonment/lack of support (subd. (g)). N.S. was detained and placed with a maternal relative.
- Mother moved out of the grow house, listed it for sale, attended therapy and support groups, tested negative for drugs, had no contact with the father, and had successful visits; the Agency nonetheless recommended jurisdiction to monitor potential future criminal involvement.
- After a contested jurisdiction/disposition hearing the juvenile court sustained the petition, adjudged N.S. a dependent, placed N.S. with Mother, and ordered family-maintenance services; Mother appealed the jurisdictional findings.
- While the appeal was pending, the juvenile court dismissed dependency jurisdiction and awarded custody of N.S. to Mother; Mother’s counsel notified the Court of Appeal and supplemental briefing was requested on mootness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel must notify the Court of Appeal of post-appeal juvenile-court rulings | Agency: notification is required when rulings affect appellate relief or merits | Mother: followed a 1992 clerk letter directing routine notification of status hearings | Court: counsel should notify only when a post-appeal ruling affects ability to grant effective relief or is otherwise relevant to merits; the 1992 letter is not binding nor reflects current law |
| Whether Mother’s appeal from jurisdictional findings is moot after juvenile court dismissed dependency and awarded custody to Mother | Mother: appeal remains live because jurisdictional findings could have future adverse consequences and should be reviewed | Agency: dismissal moots the appeal because no effective relief can be granted and dismissal was favorable to Mother | Court: appeal dismissed as moot—no effective relief remains and the jurisdictional findings do not presently adversely affect Mother |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Zeth S., 31 Cal.4th 396 (2003) (appellate review ordinarily limited to the record as of the trial court’s ruling; caution on postjudgment evidence in dependency appeals)
- Eye Dog Found. v. State Bd. of Guide Dogs for Blind, 67 Cal.2d 536 (1967) (courts decide actual controversies and dismiss moot cases where effective relief cannot be granted)
- In re William M., 3 Cal.3d 16 (1970) (court may decide issues of broad public interest or recurring disputes despite mootness)
- In re Michelle M., 8 Cal.App.4th 326 (1992) (dismissal of juvenile jurisdiction during appeal can render earlier appeal moot when no effective relief is possible)
- In re Joshua C., 24 Cal.App.4th 1544 (1994) (appeal may proceed after dismissal where jurisdictional findings continue to support restrictive custody or visitation orders)