In re Christopher M.
Annotate this CaseFather appealed from the order adjudicating his son a dependent child under Welfare and Institutions Code 300(b) and (g) and the ensuing disposition order. The court concluded that there was no evidence that, at the time of the jurisdiction/disposition hearing, Father was unwilling to provide the son with the necessities of life. Therefore, there was no evidence to support the finding of jurisdiction under section 300(b) based on Father's alleged failure to support. The court also concluded that, even if the juvenile court found that giving custody of the son to Father was not in the son's best interest, there was no evidence that Father could not make other arrangements for the son's care, including with the paternal grandmother who already had an established relationship with the son, or even with the maternal grandmother with whom the son was already placed. That placing the son with Father might not yet (or ever) be in the son's best interest, is not relevant to the only issue under section 300(g) - whether Father was able to arrange for the son's care at the time of the jurisdiction/disposition hearing. Accordingly, the court reversed the dispositional order and remanded for a new hearing.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.