Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. M.C.
233 Cal. App. 4th 1
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Juvenile court assumed jurisdiction over J.C. based on mother C.M.'s drug abuse and child’s positive test for methamphetamine.
- Father M.C. joined the petition and contested both jurisdiction and dispositional outcomes.
- Dispositional hearing denied reunification services for mother and granted reunification services for father.
- Court relied in part on father’s past conduct and mental-health concerns in ordering placement in foster care.
- Father challenges whether he knew or could have stopped mother’s drug use during pregnancy and whether he posed a risk of harm to J.C.
- Jurisdiction and dispositional orders are reviewed for substantial evidence; division relied on prior DCFS history and risks to child.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether jurisdiction was properly based on mother’s conduct | M.C. argues no need to consider his conduct | DCFS contends jurisdiction may rest on one parent’s conduct | Yes; jurisdiction proper based on mother’s conduct |
| Application of Drake M. exceptions to jurisdictional findings | Father seeks Drake M. exceptions | Arguments not shown to prejudice him or affect disposition | Drake M. exceptions not applicable; findings still upheld |
| Substantial evidence supports jurisdiction finding | DCFS shows father failed to protect during pregnancy | Father contends insufficient link due to separation and paternity questions | Substantial evidence supports finding that father knew of and failed to protect from mother’s drug use |
| Substantial evidence supports dispositional orders | J.C. would be at risk if returned; father’s sobriety not enough | Father had months of sobriety and support from relatives | Yes; substantial evidence supports removal and placement in foster care |
Key Cases Cited
- In re I.A., 201 Cal.App.4th 1484 (2011) (jurisdiction may be based on one parent’s conduct)
- In re Drake M., 211 Cal.App.4th 754 (2012) (Drake M. exceptions; if applicable, may affect analysis)
- Alliance for Children’s Rights v. Los Angeles County Dept. of Children and Family Services, 95 Cal.App.4th 1129 (2002) (waiver and consideration of alternative grounds)
- Sheila S. v. Superior Court, 84 Cal.App.4th 872 (2000) (substantial evidence standard of review in dependency cases)
- In re Christopher C., 182 Cal.App.4th 73 (2010) (substantial evidence test; review of findings)