The following is our summary of the Supreme Court’s actions on petitions for review in civil cases from the Court’s conference on Wednesday, June 17, 2015. The summary includes those civil cases in which (1) review has been granted, (2) review has been denied but one or more justices has voted for review, or (3) the Court has ordered depublished an opinion of the Court of Appeal.
In re R.T., S226416 —Review Granted; issues limited—June 17, 2015
Petition for review after the Court of Appeal affirmed orders in a juvenile dependency proceeding. The court limited review to the following issue: Does Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, subdivision (b)(1), authorize dependency jurisdiction without a finding that parental fault or neglect is responsible for the failure or inability to supervise or protect the child?
In a published opinion, In re R.T. (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 795, the Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Two, held that a showing of parental blame is not required for a juvenile court to assert dependency jurisdiction over a child placed in “substantial risk of physical harm or illness due to her parent’s ‘failure or inability . . . to adequately supervise or protect’ her.” There, the mother of a “ ‘rebellious,’ ‘incorrigible,’ and ‘out of control’ teenager” argued that the juvenile court erred in invoking dependency jurisdiction without proving that her inability to supervise or protect her child stemmed from being “unfit or neglectful.” The Court of Appeal disagreed, reasoning that “the text and purpose of the first clause of section 300, subdivision (b)(1) point to the conclusion that a showing of parental blame is not required.”
Barnes v. Dahan, S226500—Review Granted and Transferred—June 17, 2015
In this action arising from a landlord-tenant dispute, the Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Two, dismissed the tenants’ appeal based on their failure to comply with an order to pay monetary sanctions to the respondent landlord within 15 days of the order, and in light of the appellants’ “pattern of conduct.”
The Supreme Court granted review and transferred the matter to the Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Two, with directions to vacate its order dismissing the appeal. The Court directed the Court of Appeal to reconsider the respondent’s motion for sanctions and for dismissal of the appeal in light of In re Marriage of Flaherty (1982) 31 Cal.3d 637, 654, and California Rules of Court, rule 8.276(c)-(e).
Dole Food Company v. Superior Court, S226364—Review Granted and Transferred—June 17, 2015
The Supreme Court granted review and transferred the matter to the Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Three, with directions to vacate its order denying the requested petition for writ of mandate and to issue a new order directing the respondent trial court to show cause why the relief sought should not be granted.
Review Denied (with dissenting justices)