Legal Opinion

Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 6, 2006No. B193907PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PERLUSS, P. J.

If the juvenile court determines, for the safety of a child sex abuse victim, that contact between an offending father and the child he abused must be monitored at all times, may the court nonetheless permit the father to return to the family home where the abuse occurred by designating the nonoffending second parent as the monitor? No. The very concept of monitored visitation is fundamentally incompatible with around-the-clock in-home contact that necessarily includes periods when the designated monitor will be unavailable to perform his or her protective function.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. San Diego County Health & Human Services Agency v. S. S.California Court of Appeal · 2002

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Bridget A. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  2. Sonoma Cnty. Human Servs. Dep't v. Heather B. (In re C.W.), California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  3. In re I.J. CA4/2California Court of Appeal · 2020
  4. In re Rubi C. CA2/4California Court of Appeal · 2020
  5. In re Ty N. CA2/1California Court of Appeal · 2015

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API