In re Aurora P.Annotate this Case
Mother has five children who became the subjects of dependency proceedings in 2010. In 2014, after a contested hearing spanning multiple hearing dates, the juvenile court dismissed the case and entered an order stating, “Conditions do not exist which would justify initial assumption of jurisdiction under section 300 and are not likely to exist if supervision is withdrawn.” The juvenile court dismissed the dependency and ordered informal family maintenance. The court of appeal affirmed, citing Welfare and Institutions Code section 3641 and reasoning, that when the social services agency opposes termination of dependency jurisdiction, it bears the burden of proof to show the existence of the conditions section 364(c) specifies must be proven to support retention of dependency jurisdiction. In this case, however, the social services agency recommended dependency jurisdiction be terminated. Counsel for the dependent children opposed the recommendation and bore the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that conditions justifying initial assumption of dependency jurisdiction either still existed or were likely to exist if supervision were withdrawn.