CHILDREN AND THE LAW
...Dependency Petitions
......Selection & Implement. Hrg.
.........Termination of Parental Rights
............Postjudgment Evidence
7 Cards On This Topic:

Court of Appeal erred in considering and relying on postjudgment evidence to reverse order and judgment terminating parental rights.

Since all parties to stipulate to reversal of judgment terminating parental rights, case was "one of [Zeth S's] exceptional circumstances justifying reliance on postjudgment events."

Mtn by parents to strike DCFS' updated information to Ct.App. denied as documents filed in court and properly could be judicially noticed—being fundamentally different than unsworn statement in Zeth S.

Although court should have continued hearing under W&IC 366.26(c)(3), postjudgment evidence showed issue of adoptability rendered moot by Cs' subsequent placement in approved adoptive home, and any procedural error harmless.

Judicial notice of minute order showing completed home study of adoptive parents is not prohibited postjudgment evidence.

Juvenile court's failure to timely file notices sent to tribes was harmless error where record augmented on appeal; finding that ICWA did not apply was premature, but not prejudicial.

Accepting post-judgment facts on appeal to reverse order terminating parental rights not required where brother's placement did not affect C's adoptability and termination did not greatly interfere with sibling relationship.