Draft publications library test

Associate Justice Laurie D. Zelon has served on the California Court of Appeal since 2003. She has a B.A. from Cornell University and a J.D. from Harvard Law School. She has been involved in many organizations and has received numerous awards for her work in pro bono, public service, legal ethics and legal education. Justice Zelon is married and has two sons. She enjoys outdoor activities, reading, and music.

Laurence Kay was a native San Franciscan who graduated from Lowell High School, UC Berkeley, and Boalt Hall School of Law. He worked in private practice as a commercial lawyer for 17 years before being appointed to the San Francisco Municipal Court in 1981. He then served on the San Francisco Superior Court for 17 years, including two years as Presiding Judge. In 2000, he was appointed to the California Court of Appeal, Division Four, and served as Presiding Justice for three years. During his five years on the Court of Appeal, he authored over 50 published opinions and 4 published dissents. After retiring in 2005, he was appointed to several task forces by the Chief Justice.

Justice Laurence Donald Kay was appointed to the Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Four by Governor Davis in 2001 and was confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments in 2002. Prior to this, he was appointed to the Superior Court, City and County of San Francisco by Governor Brown Jr. in 1983 and was elected unopposed in 1984. He has also held various other positions in the court system, such as Presiding Judge of the San Francisco Probate Court and Assistant Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Before becoming a judge, he worked in private law practice in San Francisco and in the construction business in Southern California. He has received awards such as the "Trial Judge of the Year" Award from the San Francisco Trial Lawyers in 1992. He graduated from the University of California, Berkeley with a B.S. in 1958 and a J.D. in 1963.

Kenneth Andreen was a former associate justice of the California Court of Appeal, Fifth District. He was appointed to the Fresno Municipal Court by Governor Edmund Pat Brown in 1959, when he was 34 years old. He had been practicing law for about seven years and was the youngest judge on the bench in the state. He adjusted to his new position by doing his homework and familiarizing himself with the law. In 1961, the Fifth District Court of Appeal was created and Phil Conley, a superior court judge in Fresno, was appointed presiding justice. Kenneth enjoyed his time on the municipal court and started a court-order class to help people who were in and out of jail for being drunk. He wrote letters to everyone who attended and the class had modest successes.

Kenneth Andreen was a retired associate justice of the Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District. He was appointed to the newly-created position by Governor Brown, Jr. in 1980 and confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments. He was also a judge of the Superior Court and Municipal Court in Fresno County, California. He was an instrument-rated commercial pilot and enjoyed skiing, fishing, and camping. He was a Democrat and an Episcopalian. He graduated from Hastings College of the Law in 1951 and was admitted to the California Bar in 1952.

Keith Sparks was an Associate Justice on the Court of Appeal for the Third District in Sacramento. He was born in 1933 and grew up in Placer County, California. He attended Lincoln High School and then went to the University of California at Berkeley, and then later he went to Boalt Hall at Cal as well. He majored in political science and minored in history at Berkeley and was subject to the draft. He commuted from Placer County to the Third Appellate District downtown and listened to books on tape while he drove.

Keith Fogus Sparks was a retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District. He was appointed by Governor Brown Jr. in 1981 and confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments and the electorate in 1986. He served as a Judge of the Superior Court of Placer County from 1977 to 1981 and was the Presiding Judge in 1979. He was also a Deputy District Attorney and Chief Deputy District Attorney of Placer County from 1967 to 1977. He authored a student note for the California Law Review and wrote significant decisions on cases related to negligent infliction of emotional distress, the State Bar's use of mandatory dues, and a nominee for judicial office. Sparks served in the U.S. Navy from 1956 to 1957 and graduated from the University of California, Berkeley with a J.D. and B.A. He was a Democrat and Episcopalian.

This is a Petition for Extraordinary Writ (Juvenile Dependency) filed on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner is the child's de facto parent and is seeking extraordinary relief from the order of the superior court setting a hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 to consider termination of parental rights, guardianship, or another planned permanent living arrangement. The challenged order was made on [date of hearing] and was erroneous on the following grounds: [specify]. Supporting documents are attached. The petitioner requests that this court direct the trial court to vacate the order for hearing under section 366.26, remand for hearing, and order that reunification services be provided or continued. The petitioner also requests a temporary stay pending the granting or denial of the petition for extraordinary writ.

A juvenile court has made an order setting a hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. This hearing may result in the termination of parental rights and adoption of the child. If you want to challenge the court's decision, you must file a Notice of Intent to File Writ Petition and Request for Record within 7-27 days from the date the court set the hearing. You must also provide copies of the petition to all parties in the case, the child's CASA volunteer, the child's present caregiver, and any de facto parent who has standing to participate in the juvenile court proceedings.

This form is used to appeal a decision made in the juvenile court. It must be filled out and signed by the appellant (person filing the appeal) and their attorney, if applicable. It must be filed within 60 days after the order being appealed. In some cases, such as an order transferring jurisdiction to the criminal court, the notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days. This form is used for appeals of orders related to juvenile dependency and juvenile justice.

The Court of Appeal of the State of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division One has issued a miscellaneous order that supersedes its previous order on the same matter. This order sets forth the requirements for preparing records in juvenile dependency appeals and writs. In all appeals under Welfare and Institutions Code section 395, the juvenile court shall prepare a reporter's transcript containing the following: - For appeals from a dispositional order in proceedings under Welfare and Institutions Code section 300, all hearings from the start of the detention hearing through the dispositional order; - For appeals from a review hearing or other appealable order after the original dispositional order, all hearings during the period from the dispositional order, or when applicable the last review hearing, through the order or judgment being appealed from; - For appeals from a judgment under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 or any other appealable order after the order referring the case for a permanent plan hearing, all hearings from the referral order through the judgment or order being appealed; and - For appeals from orders after a judgment under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26 (such as an order in a post-permanency planning review hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.3), all hearings after the section 366.26 hearing and judgment.

This form is an order from the Presiding Justice of the Fourth Appellate District, Division One, in California. The order directs counsel for the appellant in juvenile dependency appeals to review the record on appeal immediately on receiving it and, if necessary, to file any motion for augmentation of the record within 15 days of the filing of the record or the appointment order, whichever is later. Counsel should transmit exhibits pursuant to California Rule of Court, rule 8.224, and therefore not include exhibits in any motion to augment the record. Counsel are also requested to submit to the court an electronic version of each brief filed in addition to the paper copies required by the rules.