Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. Andrea S.
235 Cal. App. 4th 115
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Mother and father separated in 2013; children lived primarily with mother and visited father on weekends. Father had one prior assault on mother about five years earlier.
- On May 27, 2014, after a weekend visit, father assaulted mother in the car (verbal abuse, pinching, breaking sunglasses, then punching and slapping her) while the children were present.
- Mother drove the children to the police station immediately after the assault and obtained an emergency restraining order protecting herself and the children.
- The Department filed a dependency petition under Welfare & Institutions Code section 300, subdivisions (a) and (b)(1), alleging father’s violence and mother’s failure to protect by allowing father access to the children.
- The juvenile court sustained the petition against both parents, detained children from father but ordered continued unmonitored day visits for father; mother appealed only the findings against her.
Issues
| Issue | Andrea S.'s Argument | Department/Father's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sustained jurisdictional finding under §300(a) against mother is supported by substantial evidence (risk of serious physical harm inflicted nonaccidentally by parent) | Mother argued she did not expose children to foreseeable, ongoing domestic violence and did not cause or intentionally subject children to risk; the May 27 assault was unforeseeable and isolated. | Department argued father’s assault in the children’s presence warranted jurisdiction over both parents, citing cases where similar incidents supported §300(a). | Court reversed the §300(a) finding as unsupported: no pattern of foreseeable violence by mother, and mother’s conduct did not create substantial risk. |
| Whether sustained jurisdictional finding under §300(b)(1) against mother is supported by substantial evidence (failure to protect) | Mother argued she took appropriate protective steps: immediately reported the assault and obtained a restraining order; prior assault was remote in time. | Department argued mother allowed father access to the children and thus failed to protect them. | Court reversed the §300(b)(1) finding: mother’s immediate police report and restraining order, plus separation history, showed she did not fail to protect. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Matthew S., 41 Cal.App.4th 1311 (1996) (burden for juvenile dependency jurisdiction is preponderance; appellate review is for substantial evidence)
- In re Giovanni F., 184 Cal.App.4th 594 (2010) (upholding jurisdiction where longstanding, foreseeable domestic violence and parental conduct created substantial risk to child)
- In re Alexis E., 171 Cal.App.4th 438 (2009) (when multiple grounds alleged, appellate court may affirm on any supported ground)
- In re Ashley B., 202 Cal.App.4th 968 (2011) (one unassailable jurisdictional finding can render other erroneous findings immaterial)
- In re D.C., 195 Cal.App.4th 1010 (2011) (appellate court may reach merits of challenged jurisdictional finding when it may prejudice the appellant)
- In re Daisy H., 192 Cal.App.4th 713 (2011) (remote, historical incidents of domestic violence insufficient to show current substantial risk to child)