WPC) j,!@)MVK^ZD 4,xa&t̅#tcmE1uHEtוg  j%/ n2V`>J N1G] \1|`=3+SvO, x< {0Em'*!r (G0Dhp>e&@\Q|ht|3KLpUG@k1!h\>FOPWr-!gn:VxQg{Sl8儦E}Z;< 2VLbf*xaKaG/Q#IJ#XX h ha C(h83@ Zd @ #XXB# 0   XXI.NOTICEOFAPPEAL#XX؏#  "hh @(8yb "|"|!@ i  (Yx8C"3"  32Y"3  0    Generalinformationaboutappealsindependencycases: 3"݌N (#(# Ќ   (YxxXX  WelfareandInstitutionsCodesection395governsappealsindependencycases. .~  SeealsoCode_ofCivil_ԀProceduresection917.7andCaliforniaRulesofCourt,rules39, .~ 39.1.See,specifically,rule39.1A,theexperimentalstatewide"fasttrack"rules .~ applicabletoappealsterminatingparentalrightsundersection366.26and_Family_ԀCode .~ sections7802,7807,7808,78207829,7890,7892[formerly,Civ.Code,232]. .~ ЀAsageneralrule,anappealstaysfurtherproceedingsinthetrialcourtregarding .~ mattersembracedinoraffectedbythejudgmentororderappealedfrom.Thisandother .~ basicappellateprinciples_arecodified_ԀinCodeofCivilProceduresections901through .~ 923applyinjuveniledependencyproceedings,atleasttotheextenttheyarenot .!~ inconsistent.(InreNatasha  ԀA.(1996)42Cal.App.4th28,39.) .#~ ЀHowever,oneexceptiontothegeneralruleiscontainedinCodeofCivilProcedure .%~  section917.7,whichprovides,inpertinentpart:"Theperfectingofanappealshallnot .'~"" stayproceedingsastothoseprovisionsofajudgmentororderwhichaward,change,or .)~$$ otherwiseaffectthecustody,includingtherightofvisitation,ofaminorchildinanycivil .+~&& action,inanactionfiledundertheJuvenileCourtLaw,orinaspecialproceeding...."  Thedispositionalorderadjudgingtheminortobeadependentchildofthecourt  necessarilychangesandaffectslegalcustodyandmaychangeandaffectvisitationas  well.Allsubsequentreviewhearingsareproceedings"asto"thoseprovisionsofthe   dispositionalorder,and,hence,arenotstayedbythetakingofanappeal.(Ibid.)   ЀGenerally,atrialcourtlosesjurisdictiontovacateitsownjudgmentonceaparty   noticesanappeal.Italsolosesjurisdictiontotakemostotheractionsrelatedtoits   judgment.Itmay,however,enterorderswhichonlydetermineancillaryorcollateral  matters.Amatterisnotconsideredancillaryorcollateralifitsresolutionimpactsthe  effectivenessoftheappeal.(SeePeoplev.Malveaux(1996)50Cal.App.4th1425,1434,  fn.3.)#XXh#XXThejuvenilecourt'sordervacatingitsjudgmentobviouslyimpactsthe  effectivenessofanappealthenunderwayonthatjudgmentbecauseiteliminatesthe  subjectmatteroftheappeal.#XX<#   (Yxx"3"  32Y"3  0    XX Filingofanoticeofappeal: Apartyinadependencycasehas60daysfromthe  ordertobechallengedinwhichtofileanoticeofappeal.(Calif.RulesofCourt,   rule39(b).)Anoticeofappealisfiledwhenitisdeliveredtotheclerkofthe " juvenilecourtandreceivedbytheclerktobelefton_file._Ԁ(InreBrisonC.(2000) $  81Cal.App.4th1373,1376,fn.3.)Anoticeofappealislimitedinscope:anotice &"" ofappealwhichrefersonlyto_an_Ԁorderenteredononedatebyonejudgedoesnot ($$ permitthebriefingofacompletelyseparateissueaddressedbyadifferentjudgein *&& asubsequentorder.(InreBrandonM.(1997)54Cal.App.4th1387,14001401.#XXg#)3!݌(#(# Ќ  "3"  3j2Y"3  0    Righttospeedyappeal: XXItiserrorforthetrialcourttoorderappellantsparental  rightsterminatedbutindefinitelystaythatorderpendingcompletionofadoptive  homestudy,leavingappellantinlimboastothestatusoftheterminationorderand   herabilitytoimmediatelyappealthatorder.Suchactionbythecourtis   inconsistentwiththefundamentalpolicyofdependencylawwhichseekstoresolve   casesexpeditiously.(See,e.g.,395[dependencyappealhasprecedenceoverall   othercases].)#XX#XX(InreMelvinA.(2000)82Cal.App.4th1243,1248.)#XX#3j݌(#(# Ќ   (px"3"  32"3  0    XX Latenoticesofappeal: However,inadependencycase,unlikeothercivilcases,  theoperativedateoftheorderforpurposesoftimingthefilingofthenoticeof  appealrunsfromthedateofthe oralpronouncement,notthedateofthewritten  order. (InreMarkausV.(1989)211Cal.App.3d1331,1337.)Thereisamajor  differencebetweentheappellatecourtstreatmentofnoticesofappealin  dependencycasesandincriminalcasesunderInreBenoit(1973)10_Cal.3d_Ԁ72.  Thereisnodoctrineof constructivefilingindependency.#XXS#XX(InreRickyH.(1992)   10Cal.App.4th552.)Duetothepurportedneedforfinality,thecourtsareunlikely " toexcusealatenoticeofappeal,especiallyonanappealfromaparentalrights $  termination.(InreIsaacJ.(1992)4Cal.4th525,531,andcasescitedtherein.) &"" _However,itmaystillbepossiblefortheappellatecourtstosetasideexceptional ($$ defaults.Lookforthefollowingsituations:#XXk#3 ݌*&&(#(# Ќ  ";"  ;!0  2"3  0` (#(#  XX Otherparentsappealtimely: _When_Ԁoneparentinaparentalrights  terminationcasetimelyfiles,buttheotherislate,thereisastronginterest  inresolvingthecasestogether.CaliforniaRulesofCourt,rule1463(a)  provides,inpart:"Thecourtmaynotterminatetherightsofonlyoneparent   undersection366.26unlessthatparentistheonlysurvivingparent,orthe   rightsoftheotherparenthavebeenterminated...ortheotherparenthas   relinquishedcustodyofthechildtothewelfaredepartment."Ifthecourtof   appealreversesoneparentsparentalrightsbutdoesnotevenallowthe  otherparenttoappeal,astatutoryviolationcouldoccur.(Butsee,Inre  CaitlinB.(2000)78Cal.App.4th1190,1195.)Inaddition,theinterestina  timelyandfinalresultwasnotsostrongwhentherewasanotherappeal  pending.;!*"݌` (#` (# Ќ  ";"  ;='0  2"3  0` (#(#  Writtenorderstatesthatthepartyhas60daystofileanoticeofappeal  fromitsdate: Itisnotuncommontoseeawrittenorderwith___boilerplate_  language_____wrongly_Ԁadvisingtheparentstheyhave60daysfromitsdateto   fileanoticeofappeal._Inthiscase,the_Ԁparentshouldarguethatthe " departmentshouldbeestoppedfromarguinguntimeliness.;='j'݌$ ` (#` (# Ќ  ";"  ;{*0  2"3  0` (#(#  Writtenorderrequired: Somestatutesrequirethattheorderbeissuedin &"" writtenform.Forinstances,whenjurisdictionisterminatedandexitorders ( $$ tofamilylawcourtareissuedundersection362.4,thefilingofaformal * && writtenorderinthefamilycourtisrequired.(Seealso(InreMarkausV.  (1989)211Cal.App.3d1331,1337;accord,  InreAlyssaH.(1994)22  Cal.App.4th1249,1254.);{**݌` (#` (# Ќ  ";"  ;R-0  2"3  0` (#(#  Wherechildremovedfromcaretakerwithoutcourtorder: Wherechild   isremovedfromcaretakercustodypursuanttodepartmentsexerciseofits   placementdiscretion,notpursuanttocourtorder,noordertriggersthe60   daynoticeperiodwithwhichtocalculatewhethertheappealistimely.   Dismissalofanappealforuntimelinesswouldbeimproper.#XX"#(XXInreCynthia  C.(1997)58Cal.App.4th1479,1488#XX/#.);R--݌` (#` (# Ќ  XX h h0 C(h8p @ Zd@ #XX0#XX II.AUTHORIZATIONTOAPPEAL#XX1#  * @(8yj"|"|![1@ 1 0   (#(#   XXCourtsofappealindependencycaseshavebeenmovingawayfromtheonce V sacrosanctrulethatanattorneyssignatureonanoticeofappealis_allthatisneededto V showtheintentoftheparty.______As_Ԁwillbeillustratedbelow,courtsarenowrequiringa V showingofauthorizationfromtheclientbeforeacceptinganoticeofappealsignedsolely V  bytheattorney.Inaddition,thenoticeofintenttofileawritunderrule39.1B(f)mustbe V" signedbythepartyor___a_Ԁshowingofgoodcauseforthefailuretodoso_mustbe_made.(Lisa__ V$ S.v.SuperiorCourt(1998)62Cal.App.4th604,606607.) V&!!  (Zx8C"3"  3]72Z"3  0    Generalrule:appellantorhisattorneymaysignthenoticeofappealina V(## dependencycase: UnderCaliforniaRulesofCourt,rule_1,__a_Ԁnoticeofappealmust ^*%% besignedbytheappellantorbyhisattorney.(InreAlmaB.(1994)21Cal.App.4th  1037,1043.)3]77݌(#(# Ќ  "3"  392Z"3  0    Attorney'sauthoritytoexecutenoticeofappealispresumed: Intheabsenceof  asatisfactoryshowingthatparentdidnotauthorizecounseltosignnoticeofintent,   notwithstandinghisremovalascounselofrecordatthehearing,counsel's   necessaryauthoritytoexecutenoticeofappealispresumed.(InreMalcolmD.   (1996)42Cal.App.4th904,910.)399݌ (#(# Ќ  "3"  3 <2Z"3  0    Clientdisappeared: Becauseanattorneycannotappealwithouttheclient's  consent,anoticeofappealshowntohavebeensignedbyanunauthorizedattorney  isineffectualinpreservingtherightofappeal.Whereclienthasdisappeared,  client'sauthorizationfortrialcounseltoappealorderswillnotbeimputed_.(Inre  AlmaB.(1994)21Cal.App.4th1037,1043.)3 <8<݌(#(# Ќ  "3"  3>2Z"3  0    Clientabsentfromsection366.26hearing: Aclient'sactualconsentisrequired  foranappealfromanorderterminatingparentalrightspursuanttosection366.26.  Nosuchconsentappearswhereclientisabsentfromsection366.26hearing   withoutexplanationandonlycounsel'ssignatureappearsonthenoticeofappeal; " appealdismissed.(InreSeanS.(1996)46Cal.App.4th350,352353;notethatthe $  court,however,didbrieflydiscusstheissueshereontheirmerits:seefn.2.)3>>݌&""(#(# Ќ