WPCph :S:ز *١sX|fB;'6,F_(C_ɋ|H\Rhv[GLg̪l2]WRSwe^!z+L8Ph9X-g3"&2dg޴00ynM1h+:B,) \(程3~ o> MShUE#y5'r!۝y;OơZX`ihyt~3[1{%L| Iv^M-؏UgFHe-eb1 / Jn_V܈X9p"ġcpp^qLF]jtȑ* ?S,A:)ߞ|Ĭ^M^F;kԼ$y:4.ߝ4g1lCdop՝یn3ErǛ<)kT"KuU >  0Z 0 j 0 w 0  0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0| 0n 0`! 0]" 0W# 0Q$ 0H% 0?& 03' 0'( 0) 0 * 07+ 0H, 0- 0- 0. 0j/ 0.0 00U*2 0<2 02 063 0/4 05 0:96 0s6 06 08 08 0n9U:: 0:U:R< 00< 0!= 0> 0-? 0@ 0A 0B 08C 0?D 0X6E 0 E 0F 0n!G 0:G 0:G 0 I 0  J 0-K 06GL 0<}L 0=L 03M 04)O 0]O 0vP 0@{P 0@Q 0@R 0 ;T 03[U 0V 0nW 0NX 0.Y 0Z 0nZ 0i[ 0n.\ 0<\ 0<\ 1m] 7]^ ]w]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] B] 0C]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]R^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 0LS`  a 0(a  a  a  aa 0 b#bUNe %eMe(eNf 1uf 72f 0 wf 1se .Footer !>44 <DL!><ko:Footnote RefXXXO3x6X9`("Courier 10cpiOS\  `&Times New RomanSx6X9`("Courier 10cpi< :Hanging Ind6  O56X9`("Courier 10cpiO X 5+4 44 <DL!5  5+ 4 <DL!5S\  `&Times New RomanS  ӌ6X9`("Courier 10cpi<t :Hanging Ind5   X 5+4 44 <DL!5  A74 <DL!A  <qt :Hanging Ind4    2( <DL!2  5+ 4 <DL!5  <U[ :Hanging Ind3   /% <DL!/  5+ 4 <DL!5  <n :Hanging ind2    /% <DL!/  D:4 <DL!D  <Uj :Hanging ind1   /% <DL!/  D:4 <DL!D  <Uj :hanging inde   /% <DL!/  D:4 <DL!D  0>e .Header !>44 <DL!><y:Heading-cent , , X X   2(4 44 <DL2     5+ 4 <DL!5 ,64Hyperlink< :Jan's Body 3<\q :Jan's Body 25+ 4 <DL!5J@4 <DL!J<'' :Jan's Body 1<:Jan's Body T:8Page Number<z :Petition fo1 d UUd   X  2(4 44 <DL2   5+ 4 <DL!5 UUd  <dj:Petition for     /% <DL/   5+ 4 <DL!5  <gj:Petititon fo    x 2( <DL2   5+ 4 <DL!5  6h4Quotation    2( 4 <DL<2   YO4 <DL!Y 0.Strong 64pmterms11 <z :Style Petiti d UUd   h x 5+D DD4 <DL5   5+ 4 <DL!5 UUd  <s:Table of Aut d UUd  XXX   2!  5+ 4 <DL!5 UUd  .,term1 :?/8TOA Heading d UUd     UUd4!! 2toaintoc UUd   UUd.,TOC 1 d UUd  XXX  H  2   5+ 4 <DL!5 UUd  .,TOC 2 d UUd  XXX  X  2   5+ 4 <DL!5 UUd  .,TOC 3 d UUd  XXX  X    2   5+ 4 <DL!5 UUd  .o,TOC 4 d  XXX  X    2   5+ 4 <DL!5  .r,TOC 5 ,  XXX  X  l l 2   5+ 4 <DL!5 ,  .Jh,TOC 6XXX   h h !  5+ 4 <DL!5.Jh,TOC 7 x  T T !  5+ 4 <DL!5.Jh,TOC 8 a  = = !  5+ 4 <DL!5.Jh,TOC 9 J  & & !  5+ 4 <DL!5:Od8Tripple Tab  5+ 4 <DL!5J@4 <DL!J  <:Jan's 1 1/2 <@I :Style Jan's1  5+ 4 <DL!5  >44 <DL!><:Style Jan's <:Style Italic<:Style Style  !"#$% 35;AGMU]e1I.A.1.a)(1)(a)(i)(a)^&(i)m5  d($     H !..      =XX==  _  1  Asnotedabove,inherrelatedappealincasenumberA109735.whichis  nowpendingbeforethiscourt,_Grandmother_Ԁhasthereafterarguedonappeal B thatthechildrenhadbeenerroneouslyremovedfromhercareandher $ guardianshipstatuserroneouslyterminated.( 2Q$ !..      =XX==  +X=  0  2($456#|x($..      =XX==HP LaserJet 1200 Series PCL,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(O;$0  2#  a  .3  0` (#(#337=CIOW_eI.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)1)(:h$2   .3  0  |t/5:i+00 U !..      =XX==  _ = (33 "h"  h2  I  .3  0 4   BOTHGRANDPARENTSHAVESTANDING. h݌4!4! Ќ   4 Thegeneralruleisthattohavestandingtoappeal,apersonmustbebotha  partyofrecordandsufficiently aggrievedbythejudgmentororder.(Marshv.  MountainZephyr,Inc.(1996)43_Cal.App_.4th289,295.)Althoughsomecourts   havestatedthatonlypartiesofrecordmayappeal(InreJosephG.(2000)83 x  _Cal.App_.4th712,715),DivisionOneoftheFirstDistrictCourtofAppealstated j  thatthegrandmother, althoughnotaparty,didhavestandingtoseekreviewof \  thedenialofherrequestforplacement.(InreAaronR.(2005)130_Cal.App_.4th N  697,704,citingCesarV.v.SuperiorCourt(2001)91_Cal.App_.4th1023,1034.)In @ CesarV.theappellatecourtfoundthatwhetherapersonhasstandingina 2 particularcase generallyrevolvesaroundthequestionwhetherthatpersonhas $t rightsthatmaysuffersomeinjury,actualorthreatened.(Ibid.) f  4 Forthereasonsexplainedbelowthegrandparentshavestandingonthe X issuesraisedinthisbrief. J  ";"  ; 0 4 2  A  .3  0 4!4!  Grandparentswerepartiesofrecord. ; 7݌< ! ! Ќ   4 OnJune21,2004,thecourtappointedcounselforgrandfather asDefacto !. parent.(CTI72.)Thereafter,withoutanyobjectionoroppositionfromthecourt, #   oranyparty,counselbeganappearingonbehalfofbothgrandparentsand %!" sometimesforgrandmotheralonewhenshewastheonlyoneofthetwoclients '#$ presentatthehearing.(CTI92,98,198,199.) )$&  4 Inanycase,thecourtthenitselfbegantoregularlyrefertoboth +&( grandmotherandgrandfatherasa party..(CTI90,91,92,98,102,198,199, -(* emphasisadded.)Moreover,noticeshearingswereservedongrandparentsaswell  astheircounsel.(_CTI_Ԁ103,109).Thusgrandparentswereeachapartyofrecord.  (InreMiguelE.(2004)120_Cal.App_.4th521,539[Apartyofrecordisaperson  namedasapartytotheproceedings].)TheDepartment,havingfailedtoappealor   objecttothedesignationofbothasparties,haswaiveditsrighttocontestthisnow. x  (Inre_Meranda_ԀP.(1997)56_Cal.App_.4th1143,1153.) j   ";"  ;0 4 2  B  .3  0 4!4!  Grandparentswerebothdefactoparentsandvisitationwas \  ordered. ;݌U  ! ! Ќ   4 ThecourthadawardeddefactoparentstatustograndfatheronJune21, G 2004,andappointedcounselforhim.(_CTI_Ԁ72.)Counselandthecourttreated 9 bothgrandmotherandgrandfatherasaunit.(_CTI_Ԁ90,91,92,102,139,140,198, +{ 199,RTAugust22,2005,pp.2,4,5051.)Grandmotherhadbeenawardedstatus m asthechildrenslegalguardian(RTAugust9,2004,p.11),andshefitthe _ definitionofadefactoparent.(See,InreBrittanyK.(2005)127_Cal.App_.4th Q 1497,1513.)Thus,thecourthadmadeanimpliedfindingthatgrandmotherwas C thechildrensdefactoparent,aswell,afindingtheDepartmentneverchallenged.  5 (CTpassim.;RTpassim..)ThatstatuscontinuedasthecourtonAugust22,2005, "' ordered,pursuanttotheDepartmentsrecommendation,thatvisitationbetween $ ! grandparentsandthechildrencontinue.(_CTII_Ԁ266,356.) & "#  ";"  ;0 4 2  C  .3  0 4!4!  Grandparentswereaggrievedbecauseordersremovingthe (#% childrenfromgrandmotherscustodyasthechildrenslegal )$& guardianandeffectivelyterminatinggrandmothersstatusas *%' thatlegalguardianweremadeintheabsenceofanyauthorityto +&( doso. ; ݌,') ! ! Ќ   -(*  4 Thecourtsorderterminatinggrandmothersguardianshipwaserroneous,  becausethechildrenscounselfailedtoseekremovalofthechildrenfrom  grandmotherscustodypursuanttosection388.(SeeCarlosE.(2005)129  _Cal.App_.4th1408,1418;InreNinaP.(1994)26_Cal.App_.4th615;Cal.Rulesof   Ct.,rule1466(c).)Theguardianshiporderhavingnotbeenproperlyterminated, x  grandmotherisaggrievedbysubsequentorderswhichignoreherpriorrightto j  custody. \   ";"  ;0 4 2  D  .3  0 4!4!  Theywerefurtheraggrievedbecausetheyhadalwayshada N  stronginterestinobtainingcustodyofthechildren,theyhad G beencorrectlytoldbythejuvenilecourtthattheyretainedthe @ righttoattempttogainand/orregaincustody,andtheyhad 9 alwaysbeenopposedtoanyterminationoftheirdaughters 2 parentalrights. ;F݌+{ ! ! Ќ   4 EachgrandparentmadeitcleartotheDepartmentattheoutsetofthe m proceedingsthattheirmutualgoalwasforoneorbothofthemtoobtaincustodyof _ theirgrandchildrenandtobecometheirlegalguardians.Theyappearedatthefirst Q hearingheldaftertheunnoticeddetentionhearing(_CTI_Ԁ68,12;RTMarch15, C 2004,pp.34.)Atthathearing,CountyCounselstatedthatthegrandparentshad  5 requestedplacementbutthattheDepartmenthaddeclinedtomakethatplacement "' becauseof felonyconvictionswhichwereofconcern.(_CTI_Ԁ12;RTMarch15, $ ! 2004,pp.45.)WhenGrandfatherstatedthattherewerenofelonyconvictionson & "# eitheroftheirparts,Grandfatheronlyhavingbeenchargedwithafelonyover (#% twentyyearsearlier,CountyCounselagreedthat_that_Ԁmight beaccurate.(RT *%' March15,2004,p.5.)ThecourtexplainedthattheDepartmentwas notusedto ,') reading[arapsheet]andthatitseemedasiftheissuewouldneedto be  revisited.(RTMarch15,2004,p.6.)CountyCounselsaidthattheissuewould   comeupatdisposition.(RTMarch15,2004,p.6.)Thecourtthenaskedwither  bothgrandparentswere askingthatthechildrenbeplacedwith[them]towhich   Grandfatherrespondedthathewas hopingtobeabletoraisethechildrenand x  thathewantedthem outoffostercare.(RTMarch15,2004,pp.78.) j   4 Grandmotherinformedthecourtthattheyhadalreadyhadtheirdaughter \  placedwiththemfortwoyearsandraisedher.(RTMarch15,2004,p.8.)When N  thecourtadvisedthemtoconsiderhiringanattorney,Grandfatherrespondedthat @ theywereunabletoaffordone.(RTMarch15,2004,p.8.)Whenthecourtraised 2 thegrandparentplacementissueagainattheMarch22,2004,jurisdictional $t hearing,CountyCounselrespondedthathethoughtthattheDepartmentwas f workingwiththeunclebecauseofan unfavorablereferralastothegrandmother X andthecriminalhistoryofherboyfriend,thecourtstatedthattheissuewould be J addressedinmorespecificdetailatthe_dispositional_Ԁhearing.(RTMarch22, < 2004,p.3.) !.  4 InitsApril2,2004,_dispositional_ԀreporttheDepartmentinformedthecourt #   thatbothgrandparentswere verycommittedtoprovidingpermanencyfortheir %!" grandchildren,withbothofthembeing vestedinbecominglegalguardiansfor '#$ theirgrandchildren.(_CTI_Ԁ74.)ItsaidthatwhileGrandfathercouldpursuethe )$& expensiveandtimeconsumingprocessoftakingstepstoexpungehisrecord, +&( Grandmothersbackgroundcheckhadbeen approvedandunlessshehad -(* someonelivingwithherwhodidnotpassand/orherhomewasdeemed  inappropriate,itappeared likelythatshecouldbeapprovedforplacementvery  quickly.(_CTI_Ԁ74.)Italsonotedthatitseemed reasonabletoexpectthatthe  grandmotherwouldalsoqualifyforseriousconsiderationasanadoptiveparentor   legalguardianandthatineitheroneofthesecapacitiesshewould havethe x  authoritytoauthorizeunlimitedvisitsbetweenthechildrenandthematernal j  grandfatherinthematernalgrandfathershome,therebymitigatinghisneedforan \  approvedplacement.(_CTI_Ԁ74.)Itthereforeconcludedthattherewas a N  reasonableexpectationforthechildrenspermanencywithrelativesifreunification @ [_wa]s_Ԁbypassedandrecommendedsuchabypassandthesettingofasection 2 366.26.(_CTI_Ԁ74.)AfterGrandmotheragreedtohaveherboyfriendmoveoutof $t thehouse,theDepartmentinformedthecourtthatit wouldbeappropriateandin f thechildrensbestinterestsforGrandmothertobecomethechildrenslegal X guardianifmotherwaivedservices.(_CTI_Ԁ96.) J  4 OnJune21,2004,Grandfatherrequestedthathebeappointedasthe < childrenslegalguardian.(_CTI_Ԁ7071.)HesaidthatheandGrandmotherhad !. caredfortheirinfantgranddaughterwhenmotherabandonedher.(_CTI_Ԁ70.)He #   saidhehadalsocaredforhisgrandsononmanyoccasionsandthathehadaclose %!" relationshipwithbothchildren.(_CTI_Ԁ7071.)ThecourtthenfoundGrandfatherto '#$ beadefactoparent,appointedcounselDoug_Rhoades_Ԁforhim,andorderedthat )$& theDepartmentinspecthishome.(_CTI_Ԁ72.) +&(  4 OnJune28,2004,andJuly19,2004,_Rhoades_Ԁappearedwithoutobjection -(* fromeitherthecourtorCountyCounselforbothgrandparents.(_CTI_Ԁ90,91.)On  August2,2004,andAugust9,2004,heappearedwithoutobjectionfor  _Grandmother_Ԁalone.(_CTI_Ԁ92,98.)OnAugust9,2004,Jessicawaivedservices,  thecourtappointed_Grandmother_Ԁasthechildrenslegalguardian(RTAugust9,p.   11)anditplacedthechildrenwithher(_CTI_Ԁ115). x   4 InitsJanuary14,2005,reporttheDepartmentstatedthatDoug_Rhoades_ j  was_Grandmothers_Ԁcounsel(_CTI_Ԁ114),thatbothchildrenwere stronglybonded \  with_Grandmother_Ԁandhad spentsignificanttimewithheralloftheirlives(_CTI_ N  122),andthatIsraelwas verybondedwith_Grandmother_Ԁ(_CTI_Ԁ118).Becauseof @ thestrongbondbetween_Grandmother_ԀandthechildrentheDepartmentexpressed 2 itsdesire toofferservicestoher withtheclearunderstandingthatifshefailed $t tocompletehercaseplaninsixmonths,thechildrenwouldberemovedfromher f homeandplacedintofostercareuntiltheycouldbeadopted.(_CTI_Ԁ122123.)The X  JointAssessmentfromStateAdoptionsfoundthatterminationofparentalrights J wouldbedetrimentaltothechildrenandthat_Grandmother_Ԁdidnotwanther < daughtersparentalrightstobeterminated.(_CTI_Ԁ128.) !.  4 Then,afterthecourterroneouslyremovedthechildrenfrom_Grandmothers_ #   careonJanuary24,2005,(_CTI_Ԁ139140),_Grandmother_Ԁhavinginformedthecourt %!" thatshehadwaitedoutsidethecourtroomthatdaybuthavingnotbeentoldthat '#$ thehearingwasstartingandthereforenothavingprovidedtestimonyonthe )$& removalquestion(_CTI_Ԁ141142),_Grandmother_Ԁnotonlyensuredthatthecourtwas +&( providedwithnumerousadditionallettersfromherselfandothers(_CTI_Ԁ160192) -(* butsherequestedonFebruary7,2005,thatthecourtreinstateherasthechildrens  guardian(RTFebruary7,2005;_CTI_Ԁ198)._ w  1      _ԀThecourttoldheratthatpointthatits  denialofherrequestwas certainlywithoutprejudicetochangetheplacement  backtothegrandmotherdownthelineandthatshehadtherighttofileasection   388petitionforthatinthefuture.(RTFebruary7,2005,pp.89;CT198.) x   4 _Grandmother_Ԁthereaftercontinuedtoexpressconcernthatthechildren j  shouldbe withfamily.(CTII256.)Moreover,thechildrencontinuedtoindicate \  thattheywishedtobereturnedto_Grandmothers_Ԁhome.AccordingtoAtteridge, N  Athenacontinuedto display[] alotoffamilyloyaltyangst...regardingher @ grandmother and beingmovedfrom_Grandmothers_Ԁhomebecauseshe  often 2  question[ed]Atteridge onwhyshewasremovedfromhergrandmothers $t home. (CTII253,emphasisadded.)Additionally,Israel talk[ed] alot abouthis f grandmotherandsaidthathe  want[ed]tobewithher .(CTII255,emphasis X added.) J  4 PriortotheAugust22,2005,hearingneither_Grandmother_Ԁnor_Grandfather_ < wereinformedofthefactthatthecourtcouldterminateparentalrightsand !. thereby,byinvokingsubdivision(j)ofsection366.26,deprivethemoftheability #   tofileasection388petitiontoobtaincustodyabsentashowingthatState %!" Adoptionswasabusingitsdiscretioninchoosingaplacementforthechildren(see  DepartmentofSocialServicesv.SuperiorCourt(1997)58Cal.App.4th721,734  [68Cal.Rptr.2d239](TheodoreD.)).(CTIIpassim.;RTpassim.)   4 AttheconclusionofAugust22,2005,hearingthecourtbothterminated   Jessicasparentalrightsbecauseithadconcludedthatalthough aclearspecific x  relativeorstrangeradoption_ha[d_]notbeenestablishedat_th[at_]time,there j   _appear[ed_]tobeoneinthehorizonand ifthat_f[ell_]apart,thechildrenwere \  still clearlyadoptable.(RTAugust22,2005,p.63.) N   4 Thusthegrandparentsinterestinobtainingand/orregainingcustodyofthe @ children,aswellastheirrighttoattempttodoso,andtheirinterestinpreventing 2 terminationoftheirdaughtersparentalrightssothattheycouldattempttodoso $t wassubstantiallyharmed,giventhefactthatpursuanttosection366.26(j)once f parentalrightswereterminated,therighttodetermineplacementofthechildren X wastransferredfromthejuvenilecourttoStateAdoptionsandunlessthehigh J standardofabuseofdiscretioninthatplacementcouldbeshown(seeTheodore < D.,supra)andthepowertodetermineplacementreturnedtothejuvenilecourt, !. anysection388petitionwhichtheymighthavepreviouslybeenabletopursue, #   hadtheyhadnoticethatthecourtwasbentuponterminatingparentalrightsinthe %!" faceofstrongoppositionbytheDepartment,theycouldnotlongerpursue.Had '#$ theybeenabletofilethatpetitionandhadthecourtruledfavorablyuponit,they )$& wouldhaveobtainedwhatDivisionOneinitsopinioninAaronR.supra,130 +&( _Cal.App_.4thatp.703referredtoas fleetingstatusasthechildrenscaretakers -(* whichwouldhave,pursuanttosubdivision(k)ofsection366.26,giventhem  placementpriority,thatstatute _assure[ing_]interestedrelativesthattheir  applicationsforthechildscustodywillbeconsideredbeforeastrangers  application(Ibid.).    4 Forthesereasons,aswell,_Grandmother_Ԁand_Grandfather_Ԁwereaggrievedby x  the_order.___