Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. Maria R.
216 Cal. App. 4th 1110
Cal. Ct. App.2013Background
- Nadia G., a nonminor dependent in foster care, was declared a dependent in 2010 at age 17 due to parental neglect and instability.
- The juvenile court ordered the Department to provide counseling, trauma-focused therapy, a parenting program, and a substance abuse program, and to monitor schooling.
- Nadia exhibited chronic instability, truancy, runaways, and periods of engagement followed by noncompliance with services.
- From 2011 to 2012 Nadia repeatedly went missing or avoided services, complicating placement and supervision efforts.
- In June 2012 the court terminated jurisdiction, finding Nadia not participating in a reasonable and appropriate TILP, but the Department had failed to file a section 391 report as required.
- The appellate court reversed and remanded, holding termination premature because the Department did not comply with section 391 reporting and related procedural requirements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination was proper under section 391. | Nadia not participating in a TILP justifies termination. | Despite not fully engaging, the court should follow 391 procedures before termination. | Termination premature; procedures not satisfied. |
| Whether Nadia's lack of participation in the TILP supports termination under section 391, subdivision (c)(1)(B). | Record shows Nadia refused services and failed to engage in TILP. | Nadia’s lack of participation was not adequately evidenced or weighed against best interests without proper reporting. | Record supports nonparticipation but cannot sustain termination without 391 report. |
| Whether the Department’s failure to file a section 391 report bars termination. | Court can terminate based on existing record; report not required to sustain. | Department must file a section 391 report and verify provision of required information to Nadia. | Termination reversed; Department failed to comply with 391 reporting. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Holly H., 104 Cal.App.4th 1324 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002) (continued dependency requires engagement with services; failure to participate undermines termination)
- In re Tamika C., 131 Cal.App.4th 1153 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005) (best interests and procedural compliance when terminating jurisdiction)
- In re Casey D., 70 Cal.App.4th 38 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999) (court’s credibility determinations and reliance on continued participation)