CHILDREN AND THE LAW
...Dependency Petitions
......Dismissal of Dependency
.........In General
 18 Cards On This Topic:
  • Court may dismiss petition when juvenile court satisfied jurisdiction not required.
  • Dismissal of dependency after adoption, guardianship or long term foster care.
  • Marriage does not affect a nonminor dependent's eligibility for extended foster care.
  • Juvenile court properly denied mother's request to dismiss petition because it was in C's best interest for the court to supervise her special needs treatment and reunification.
  • Clear abuse of discretion to make findings that difficult C was at risk in her home, yet return her to the home and terminate supervision and dependency.
  • W&IC 364(c) permits juvenile ct. to retain jurisdiction if sufficient evidence supports it, notwithstanding recommendation of DCFS to terminate jurisdiction.
  • Although record supported W&IC 391(c)(1)(B) finding to justify terminating jurisdiction over teenager, order was premature; reversal req'd for DCFS to file the necessary reports and juvenile court to make appropriate findings.
  • Trial court was not justified in asserting dependency jurisdiction over child where there was no evidence of parental abuse or neglect; per W&IC 356, petition must be dismissed.
  • Barring exceptional and exigent circumstances not present here, juvenile court may not dismiss a dependency petition, sua sponte and with no advance notice, at end of detention hearing.
  • Juvenile court abused its discretion under W&IC 303 and rules governing W&IC 388 petitions when it determined it had no jurisdiction over 18-yr. old and summarily denied guardian's reinstatement petition without full hearing.
  • Harmless error to proceed under W&IC 364 where undisputed evidence supported finding there was no need for continued supervision, and termination of dependency court's jurisdiction was proper.
  • DHS's desire to save money by terminating dependency not sufficient to override child's best interests, which are to remain a dependent until graduating from high school.
  • Because juvenile court found it in C's best interest to have visitation with mother, it abused its discretion in ordering guardianship and terminating dependency jurisdiction after appointing a legal guardian who planned to move to another state.
  • Jurisdiction should be retained by court beyond dependent's 18th birthday only where there is existing or reasonably foreseeable threat of harm.
  • Because of indeterminacy of best interest standard and autonomy to which person over 18 is entitled, once s/he reaches majority, juvenile ct. must give substantial deference to her/his wishes before retaining jurisdiction.
  • Absent evidence of current or future threatened harm to Cs beyond age18, juvenile ct. abused discretion by extending jurisdiction to help them finish college.
  • Welf. & Inst. Code §350 (c) doesn’t give parent right to present evidence supporting dependency petition when Agency and M’s counsel agree petition should be dismissed for insufficient evidence.
  • Before dismissing dependency petition, court must find dismissal in interests of justice and welfare of M requires it.


    •