FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Family Law

In re: Smith

Fri, 6 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Bankruptcy Law, Contracts, Debt Collection, Family Law, Government Law) Order of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel reversing an order of the Bankruptcy Court is affirmed as a late alimony payment penalty was not a domestic support obligation, and as such, the ex-wife's claim was a general unsecured claim not entitled to priority status and consequently dischargeable.

Miller v. Nichols

Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Family Law, Government Law, Health Law) In plaintiffs' constitutional challenge to the state's removal of their child after termination proceedings and motion for injunctive relief to prevent a foster family's adoption of the child, district court's dismissal of the case is affirmed where: 1) the district court correctly determined that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction to review plaintiffs' motion for injunctive relief to prevent the child's adoption pursuant to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine; and 2) the factual issues underlying plaintiffs' claims were addressed by the state court and are barred by issue preclusion.

M.T. v. Sup. Ct.

Fri, 30 Oct 2009 21:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Family Law) Petitioner's request for an extraordinary writ review of a juvenile court's order for a Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 hearing to consider modifying the permanent plan for two of his three children from long-term foster care to adoption is denied as petitioner did not have a right to a contested hearing.

In re Calvin P.

Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Family Law, Juvenile Law) Juvenile court's decision requiring the San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency to provide family maintenance services for plaintiff and her children is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the order requiring family maintenance services for father and the children is affirmed; but 2) the order for family maintenance services for mother is reversed and instead ordered that she be provided reasonable reunification services.

In re J.B.

Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Administrative Law, Family Law, Juvenile Law) Juvenile court's findings and orders regarding defendant's two children is affirmed as there was sufficient evidence to support the jurisdictional findings and the orders removing the children from her custody.

Long v. Teachers' Ret. Sys. of State of Illinois

Fri, 23 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Civil Rights, Family Law, Government Law, Health Law, Labor & Employment Law) In plaintiff's employment discrimination and retaliation action against her former employer, summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed where, because plaintiff failed to present evidence that defendant acted with retaliatory intent when it fired her, a jury could not infer that defendant fired her because she took FMLA leave.

Green v. Mattingly

Wed, 21 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 2d Cir., Civil Procedure, Family Law, Government Law, Injury And Tort Law) In an action claiming that defendants violated the U.S. Constitution and New York law when they successfully petitioned the family court of New York for an order temporarily removing plaintiff's child from her custody, dismissal of the action is vacated in part where: 1) the family court issued a superseding order returning plaintiff's child to her custody, and the family court proceedings were eventually dismissed, so plaintiff was not a "state-court loser" under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine; and 2) in addition, her claims did not "invite district court review and rejection" of a state court judgment. However, the dismissal is affirmed in part where plaintiff failed to allege that the family court proceeding was terminated in her favor and thus did not state a malicious prosecution claim.

In re R.N.

Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Family Law, Government Law, Juvenile Law) Dependency court's order appointing minor's aunt as the successor guardian and a separate order summarily denying father's subsequent Welfare & Institutions Code section 388 petition challenging the appointment is reversed as the failure to consider the provisions of section 366.3(f) deprived father of his rights to participate, to be considered as the guardian, and to be eligible to receive reunification services without the requirement that he file his own section 388 petition.

In re Damian C.

Thu, 8 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Family Law, Indian Law, Juvenile Law) In a case brought by the Health and Human Services Agency to remove defendant's one-year-old son on the basis of her drug use, trial court's jurisdictional and dispositional orders are affirmed, but the matter is remanded to the juvenile court to vacate its finding that the ICWA does not apply and to instruct the agency to complete ICWA inquiry and notice.

In re J.O.

Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(Cal. App., Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Family Law, Government Law, Indian Law, Juvenile Law) In dependency proceedings, trial court's jurisdictional findings and orders that pertained to plaintiff despite having ruled that he was not the presumed father, are affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded where: 1) the evidence established plaintiff's presumed father status; 2) the finding of jurisdiction under Welfare and Institutions Code, section 300(b) is reversed as there is no causal nexus between the court's findings of serious injury and the findings relating to plaintiff; 3) court's finding of jurisdiction under section 300(g) is affirmed as it is supported by plaintiff's failure to provide financial support for over a decade combined with his demonstrated lack of interest in the children's welfare; and 4) on remand, the trial court must make the inquiry concerning plaintiff's possible Indian ancestry required by ICWA and the California Rules of Court.

In re Marriage of Knowles

Tue, 6 Oct 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Family Law) Trial court's modification of the father's child support obligation is reversed and remanded as the court violated Family Code section 4057.5(a)(1) by considering the half of the community income attributable to the father's subsequent spouse.

Cooney v. Rossiter

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Family Law, Government Law, Injury And Tort Law) In plaintiff's case against several defendants arising from a custody case in which the Illinois state court found that she suffered from Munchausen syndrome by proxy, district court's dismissal of her suit is affirmed where: 1) guardians ad litem and court-appointed experts, including psychiatrists, are absolutely immune from liability for damages when they act at the court's direction; 2) no factual allegations tie the defendants, who are private individuals, to a conspiracy with a state actor; and 3) district court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff's Rule 59(e) motion.

Estate of Pryor

Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(Cal. App., Entertainment Law, Family Law, Probate, Trusts & Estates) In an appeal involving presumptive disqualification of a care custodian from receiving a donative transfer from a dependent or elder adult, trial court's judgment against the daughter of comedian Richard Pryor and in favor of stepmother is affirmed as there is no support in the language of section 21351(a) or in the legislative history which would make the spousal exception to the presumption of invalidity unavailable to a spouse who allegedly persuaded the transferor to marry through undue influence or fraud.

Manela v. Superior Court

Wed, 23 Sep 2009 20:00:01 PDT

(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Evidence, Family Law) In a marital dissolution action involving a discovery dispute over child custody, wife's petition for mandate, challenging a trial court's granting of the husband's motion to quash wife's subpoenas of medical records on the ground that the documents were protected by the physician-patient privilege, is granted in part and denied in part where: 1) the trial court abused its discretion by quashing the subpoena to a doctor where the statements were made in the wife's presence and therefore not protected by the privilege; 2) the husband's claim that his medical records are protected by his constitutional right to privacy is rejected as this right is not absolute and his privacy interests are outweighed by the state's compelling interest in protecting the child's best interests; and 3) the trial court did not abuse its discretion with respect to quashing the subpoena to a subsequent doctor because the documents sought by the wife were privileged.

S.T. v. Superior Court

Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:00:02 PDT

(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Criminal Law & Procedure, Family Law, Government Law) Petition for extraordinary writ by an incarcerated father to vacate the order of a juvenile court issued at a hearing terminating his reunification services and setting a permanency planning hearing as to his daughter is granted as trial court has discretion at the six-month review to continue or terminate reunification services.