Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County Super. Ct. No. DP014516, Gary G. Bischoff, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Reversed and remanded pursuant to stipulation of the parties.
Nicole Williams, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Benjamin P. de Mayo, County Counsel, and Karen L. Christensen, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
SILLS, P. J.
S.C. appeals from the termination of her parental rights to her son, A.B. The issue on appeal is whether the Orange County Social Services Agency (SSA) failed to give proper notice under the Indian Child Welfare Act (25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.) (ICWA). The parties to the appeal have stipulated that the judgment of the juvenile court terminating parental rights should be reversed and the remittitur issued forthwith because the notices sent to the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the tribal entities identified by the father were defective; thus, the juvenile court’s finding that ICWA did not apply was not supported by substantial evidence. We accept the stipulation and reverse.
A.B. was detained along with his sister in December 2006 based on the father’s sexual abuse of the sister. The mother lived out of state and had infrequent contact with the children. The children were made dependents of the juvenile court and removed from parental custody; the parents were offered reunification services.
Both parents were questioned about any Native American ancestry. The mother indicated she had some American Indian heritage but did not know which tribe. The father stated he had Cherokee ancestry and that his mother was a registered member of a Cherokee tribe. He gave the social worker his mother’s name, maiden name, and date of birth. SSA sent notice to the BIA and three Cherokee tribes; returned receipts and responses denying Indian heritage were received. The juvenile court found that notice had been sent in accordance with ICWA.
The juvenile court terminated reunification services to the parents at the 12-month review hearing. The sister had turned 18 in May 2007, and her dependency proceedings were terminated. A.B. did not want to live with or visit the mother. The juvenile court terminated parental rights on May 10, 2008.
On appeal, the mother points out that the ICWA notices were filled out with information from another case, i.e., the names and claimed tribal affiliations were completely unrelated to A.B.’s case. SSA agrees the notices were inadequate and that the judgment must be reversed.
We have examined the record and find “[t]here is no reasonable possibility that the interests of non parties or the public will be adversely affected by the reversal” in this case and “[t]he reasons of the parties for requesting reversal outweigh the erosion of public trust that may result from the nullification of a judgment and the risk that the availability of stipulated reversal will reduce the incentive for pretrial settlement.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 128, subds. (a)(8)(A) & (a)(8)(B).) Reversal is in the best interest of the parties because it will avoid prolonged litigation involving the application of ICWA and will allow the juvenile courts to ensure that the rights of the involved tribes are protected.
We reverse the judgment terminating parental rights. This case is remanded to the juvenile court, with directions to order the Agency to give proper ICWA notice to any applicable tribes and the BIA. If, after proper notice, no tribe seeks to intervene or otherwise indicates A.B., is an Indian child, the court shall reinstate the judgment. The remittitur shall issue forthwith.
WE CONCUR:
O’LEARY, J., MOORE, J.