In Re Phoenix B. (1990)
green
· 54 citation events
across 2 courts.
Showing the 9 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
199020082026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
In re Kathryn H. CA1/3 (2025)
(See, e.g., In re A.G. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 675, 683 [court erred sustaining petition that only alleged mother was unable to care for minors where father was properly caring for them]; In re Phoenix B. (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 787, 792 [declining to assert dependency jurisdiction over minor based on mother’s conduct where father was willing and able to prove care].) Moreover, father does not proffer a specific challenge to any dispositional order, only the jurisdictional find…
green
In re R.B. CA4/3 (2022)
Who else is there when juvenile court jurisdiction has been correctly terminated?” (In re John W. (1996) 41 Cal.App.4th 961, 976-977 ; see In re Alexandria M. (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 1088, 1098-1099 [affirming order terminating dependency jurisdiction, reversing juvenile court’s order regarding custody, visitation, and child support, and remanding those issues to the family court]; In re Phoenix B. (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 787, 794-795 [“juvenile court does not have jurisdiction…
Upon a finding and declaration of paternity by the juvenile court or proof of a prior declaration of paternity by any court of competent jurisdiction, the juvenile court may order services for the child and the biological father, if the court determines that the services will benefit the child.” “[Ojnly a presumed, not a mere biological, father is a ‘parent’ entitled to receive reunification services under section 361.5.” (Zacharia D., supra, 6 Cal.4th at p. 451 .) “ ‘[Pjare…
green
In Re Vincent M. (2008)
Upon a finding and declaration of paternity by the *764 juvenile court or proof of a prior declaration of paternity by any court of competent jurisdiction, the juvenile court may order services for the child and the biological father, if the court determines that the services will benefit the child." "[O]nly a presumed, not a mere biological, father is a `parent' entitled to receive reunification services under section 361.5." ( Zacharia D., supra, 6 Cal.4th at p. 451 , 24 C…
Discussion Section 361.2 5 establishes the procedures a court must follow for placing a dependent child following removal from the custodial parent pursuant to section 361. 6 (In re Phoenix B. (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 787, 792 [ 267 Cal.Rptr. 269 ].) Subdivision (a) of section 361.2 provides that when a court orders removal of a minor under section 361, the court “shall first determine” whether there is a parent who wants to assume custody who was not residing with the minor at…
green
In Re Marquis D. (1995)
DISCUSSION Section 361.2 [5] establishes the procedures a court must follow for placing a dependent child following removal from the custodial parent pursuant to section 361. [6] ( In re Phoenix B. (1990) 218 Cal. App.3d 787, 792 [ 267 Cal. Rptr. 269 ].) Subdivision (a) of section 361.2 provides that when a court *1821 orders removal of a minor under section 361, the court "shall first determine" whether there is a parent who wants to assume custody who was not residing with…
green
Orange County Social Services Agency v. Wendy H. (1993)
The only relevant category in this case is section 7004, subdivision (a)(4), which provides that a natural father may become a presumed father if “[h]e receives the child into his home and openly holds out the child as his natural child.” (See In re Phoenix B. (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 787, 790, fn. 3 [ 267 Cal.Rptr. 269 ]; id. at p. 792 [presumed father status achieved when alleged father “came forward when the Department instituted dependency proceedings, offered to care for h…
green
In Re Zacharia D. (1993)
The only relevant category in this case is section 7004, subdivision (a)(4), which provides that a natural father may become a presumed father if "[h]e receives the child into his home and openly holds out the child as his natural child." (See In re Phoenix B. (1990) 218 Cal. App.3d 787, 790, fn. 3 [ 267 Cal. Rptr. 269 ]; id. at p. 792 [presumed father status achieved when alleged father "came forward when the Department instituted dependency proceedings, offered to care for…
“Section 361.2 establishes the procedures the court must follow for placing a dependent child with a noncustodial parent or other relative or caretaker following removal from the custodial parent pursuant to section 361.” *183 (In re Phoenix B. (1990) 218 Cal.App.3d 787, 792 [ 267 Cal.Rptr. 269 ].) Section 361.2, subdivision (a) provides the procedure for the court’s direct placement of a dependent child with a noncustodial parent, under specified conditions.