705 ILCS 405/1-17
With respect to any minor for whom the Department of Children and Family Services Guardianship Administrator is appointed the temporary custodian or guardian, the Guardianship Administrator may designate in writing a private agency or an employee of a private agency to appear at court proceedings and testify as to the factual matters contained in the casework files and recommendations involving the minor
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IL-ILGAilga.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(705 ILCS 405/1-17)
(from Ch. 37, par. 801-17)
Sec. 1-17.
With respect to any minor for whom the Department of
Children and Family Services Guardianship Administrator is appointed the
temporary custodian or guardian, the Guardianship Administrator may
designate in writing a private agency or an employee of a private agency to
appear at court proceedings and testify as to the factual matters contained in
the casework files and recommendations involving the minor. The private agency
or the employee of a private agency must have personal and thorough knowledge
of the facts of the case in which the appointment is made. The designated
private agency or employee shall appear at the proceedings. If the Court finds
that it is in the best interests of the minor that an employee or employees of
the Department appear in addition to the private agency or employee of a
private agency, the Court shall set forth the reasons in writing for their
required appearance.
(Source: P.A. 87-1147.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2014–2021 · leading case: In re B.S.
In re B.S. (2021)
“See 20 ILCS 505/23 (West 2018); 705 ILCS 405/1-17 (West 2018). Therefore, we vacate that portion of the circuit court’s order assigning DCFS as the caseworker in this matter.”
In re B.S. (2021)
“See 20 ILCS 505/23 (West 2018); 705 ILCS 405/1-17 (West 2018). Therefore, we vacate that portion of the circuit court’s order assigning DCFS as the caseworker in this matter.”
In re N.M. (2014)
“) The Director contends the juvenile court erred by ordering DCFS employees to appear at the hearings because (1) section 1-17 of the Juvenile Court Act of 1987 (Juvenile Act) (705 ILCS 405/1-17 (West 2012)) establishes a general rule that a private-agency caseworker assigned to…”
In re N.M. (2014)
“) The Director contends the juvenile court erred by ordering DCFS employees to appear at the hearings because (1) section 1-17 of the Juvenile Court Act of 1987 (Juvenile Act) (705 ILCS 405/1-17 (West 2012)) establishes a general rule that a private-agency caseworker assigned to…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.
|