242 Cal. App. 4th 450
Cal. Ct. App.2015Background
- In re K.M., a child, SSA sought termination of parental rights in Orange County; ICWA inquiry and notice were not completed before judgment.
- SSA conceded ICWA was not properly investigated or noticed; it attempted to remedy post-judgment while appeal was pending.
- The juvenile court terminated parental rights without proper ICWA findings or notice.
- Postjudgment ICWA order attempting to revive the inquiry was entered, but these actions were after termination and during appeal.
- Court held such postjudgment actions are void and lacked jurisdiction to alter the termination order on collateral ICWA grounds.
- Matter remanded for limited ICWA notice to tribes, with reinstatement of termination if no tribe identifies the child as Indian.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether postjudgment ICWA proceedings affect the appeal | SSA argues new ICWA evidence moots the appeal | Parents contend court lacked jurisdiction to review ICWA collateral issues after termination | No mootness; court lacked jurisdiction to review collateral ICWA issues; remand for proper notice |
| Whether the juvenile court had jurisdiction to address ICWA after termination | SSA asserts remand and new notices justify reconsideration | Termination order is final and not subject to collateral modification | Juvenile court lacked jurisdiction to modify post-termination ICWA findings; reversal warranted |
| Whether failure to provide ICWA notice requires remand, not reversal on the merits | Notice deficiency warrants remediation | Notices were insufficient and should be corrected on remand | Remand for proper ICWA notice and findings, with potential reinstatement of termination if tribes indicate no Indian child |
| Whether the appeal is moot due to SSA's postjudgment efforts | Postjudgment actions could moot the appeal | Mootness did not attach; collateral actions void | Appeal not moot; limited reversal and remand ordered |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Jerred H., 121 Cal.App.4th 793 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004) (legislature bars modification after final termination; jurisdiction issues)
- In re Zeth S., 31 Cal.4th 396 (Cal. 2003) (cannot consider postjudgment evidence to overturn termination; distinguishable)
- In re Ronald V., 13 Cal.App.4th 1803 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993) (collateral attacks on termination void; lack of jurisdiction to modify)
- In re Kahlen W., 233 Cal.App.3d 1414 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991) (notice requirements; failure requires remand)
- In re Desiree F., 83 Cal.App.4th 460 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000) (ICWA notice impact on termination orders)