In re Kimberly S.

83 Cal. Rptr. 2d 740 (1999)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Kimberly S.

California Court of Appeal
83 Cal. Rptr. 2d 740 (1999)

Facts

Leanne W. (defendant) had a child, Kimberly S., born in September 1996. In December 1996, Leanne was arrested for being under the influence of drugs. The Fresno County Department of Social Services (department) filed a juvenile-dependency petition, alleging that Leanne could not properly care for Kimberly because Leanne had an addiction to drugs. The department placed Kimberly with an aunt. In April 1997, the court found that the allegations in the petition were true and ordered Leanne to undergo treatment. Later in the year, Kimberly began living with a grandmother. At a hearing that fall, the court found that Leanne had been abstaining from drugs and progressing in her treatment requirements. The court ordered reunification efforts to continue, and Kimberly remained with the grandmother. Leanne abstained from drugs but did not fulfill her treatment requirements. In February 1998, Leanne told the department that she was giving her parental rights to the grandmother and leaving the area to visit her other children in a different state. Based on Leanne’s statements and failure to fulfill her treatment requirements, the department recommended that the court end reunification efforts and order the department to begin making plans for Kimberly’s permanent care. At a 12-month review hearing, the juvenile court adopted the department’s recommendations. The court ordered Kimberly to remain in the care of her grandmother. At the subsequent permanency-planning hearing, the court found that the grandmother was a suitable person to adopt Kimberly. The court found that Leanne’s visits to Kimberly had been sporadic and terminated Leanne’s parental rights in August 1998. Leanne appealed, arguing that she had the right to an opportunity to enter a kinship-adoption agreement before her parental rights were terminated.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Vartabedian, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership