From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Marilyn H.

California Court of Appeals, Fifth District
Feb 27, 1992
4 Cal. Rptr. 2d 927 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)

Opinion

Appeal from the Superior Court, Kern County; Robert Anspach, Len M. McGillivray, Judges and Peter A. Warmerdam, Juvenile Court Referee.

Lucretia H. Parks, Berkeley, for minors.

Kimball J.P. Sargeant, Sacramento, for defendant and appellant.

B.C. Barmann, County Counsel, Stacy Inman, Deputy, Bakersfield, for plaintiff and respondent.


Prior report: Cal.App., 4 Cal.Rptr.2d 79 (1992).

OPINION ON DENIAL OF REHEARING

BUCKLEY, Associate Justice.

In a petition for rehearing filed on behalf of appellant, we are directed for the first time to Welfare and Institutions Code section 366, subdivision (a) and are urged to find that this section authorizes, if not compels, consideration of reunification as an option under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26, subdivision (b). We note that "[c]ounsel are not permitted to argue their cases in a piecemeal fashion and points not previously argued will not be considered where raised for the first time on petition for rehearing." (Smith v. Crocker First Nat. Bank (1957) 152 Cal.App.2d 832, 837, 314 P.2d 237.)

While given the discretion to relax the above-stated rule upon a showing of good cause (cf. Sime v. Malouf (1949) 95 Cal.App.2d 82, 116, 212 P.2d 946), we find no good cause shown here. Appellant's petition for rehearing is denied.

BEST, P.J., and MARTIN, J., concur.


Summaries of

In re Marilyn H.

California Court of Appeals, Fifth District
Feb 27, 1992
4 Cal. Rptr. 2d 927 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)
Case details for

In re Marilyn H.

Case Details

Full title:In re MARILYN H., et al., Persons Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. v…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fifth District

Date published: Feb 27, 1992

Citations

4 Cal. Rptr. 2d 927 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)