In re I.C.: Cal. Supreme Court Dependency Case Decision
Last week, the California Supreme Court held that certain “unclear, confusing, not credible, and unreliable” statements by a three-year-old child were not sufficient to remove her parent from the home. The case will have significant importance for other families as the principles applied, in the Court’s words, “guard against the risk that children will needlessly be separated from their parents ...” In re I.C.
, S229276 (filed Apr. 26, 2018).
In re I.C.
, expertly litigated by FDAP Staff Attorney Louise Collari, has implications for dependency cases involving the sufficiency of the evidence supporting jurisdictional allegations based on uncorroborated hearsay statements, CALICO interviews, the substantial evidence standard of review, and mootness. A practice tip alert regarding the implications of In re I.C.
will be distributed to the dependency panel in the coming days.