Legal Opinion
E.G. v. A.G.
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 19, 2011No. E051664PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RICHLI, Acting P. J.
A.G. (the mother) gave birth to a son (the child). When the child was two, he was adopted—supposedly with the mother’s written consent—by the mother’s mother, E.G. (the grandmother), and her husband, B.C., Sr. (the stepgrandfather). They renamed him B.C., Jr.
When the child was five and a half, the mother filed a motion to set aside the adoption. She alleged extrinsic fraud, in that she had been told that what she was consenting to was a temporary guardianship, not an adoption. The trial court denied the motion as time-barred under Family Code section 9102. The…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. WoodsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Armstrong v. ManzoSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- People v. American Contractors Indemnity Co.California Supreme Court · 2004
- In Re BGCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. Ivy B.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- In re C.A. CA4/2California Court of Appeal · 2013