CHILDREN AND THE LAW
...Dependency Petitions
......Periodic Review Hearings
.........Motions for Modification
............Burden of Proof for Modif.
 12 Cards On This Topic:
  • Burden of proof in petitions for modification.
  • Because W&IC §388 did not permit application of clear and convincing BofP to parents' modification petitions, abuse of discretion to require them to meet the higher burden of proof in order to modify the bypass order.
  • Cs and Agency demonstrated sufficient “new evidence” of Cs' behavioral problems after parental visits to justify W&IC 388 modification of previous visitation order and termination of visitation.
  • Independent evidence apart from that provided by possibly biased SWs supported juvenile ct.'s decision to deny W&IC 388 petition to change placement of Cs to maternal grandparents rather than paternal grandparents.
  • No abuse of discretion in summarily denying F's W&IC 388 petition where F did not state he could currently provide for Cs, sought only to continue proceedings initiated 36 mos. Earlier, and did not make requisite BIC showing.
  • Juvenile court erred in modifying order for bonding study by Spanish-speaking psychologist based on changed circumstance that DHHS couldn't find one; w/out bonding study, error to then terminate parental rights.
  • No abuse of discretion in refusing to modify visitation order where mother failed to show that despite change of circumstances, undoing original order would be in Cs' best interests.
  • Mother did not show changed circumstances where, given the severity of her drug problem, court could reasonably find her short-term sobriety was not particularly compelling.
  • Even under preponderance of evidence standard, findings not sufficient to support finding of changed circumstances or a finding the proposed change to another foster home because of dog injury was in C's best interests.
  • Application of clear and convincing standard on Welf. & Inst. Code §387 petition may be presumed.
  • Parent’s burden on modification to show by preponderance of evidence there is new evidence or changed circumstances making change of placement, incl. terminating legal guardianship, in M’s best interests.
  • Although court applied "clear and convincing" rather than "preponderance" standard in denying W&I 388 petition, denial proper as court found ••no•• evidence of changed circumstances.


    •