## Facts

- San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency filed a juvenile dependency petition regarding minor Francisco W.
- Francisco’s father informed the Agency he might have Cherokee ancestry, giving the court and Agency reason to know ICWA could apply.
- The Agency sent ICWA notices to the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the three federally recognized Cherokee tribes.
- The notices omitted key identifying information about the child’s family members that was known or reasonably obtainable.
- The Bureau of Indian Affairs and two tribes responded that they could not determine membership or eligibility due to missing information and did not intervene.
- The juvenile court found ICWA notice adequate, determined ICWA did not apply, and terminated parental rights at a Welfare and Institutions Code § 366.26 hearing, with a plan for adoption by the child’s grandmother.
- Father and Francisco appealed, challenging the ICWA notice finding and arguing the appellate remedy should reopen the termination order without limitation.

## Issues

1. Whether the Agency satisfied ICWA’s notice requirements when its notices omitted key known or reasonably obtainable family information and tribes reported they could not determine membership or eligibility.
2. Whether an appellate court may order a limited (conditional) reversal that remands only for ICWA-compliant notice and related proceedings, with reinstatement of the termination order if ICWA is found inapplicable.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal held the Agency failed to comply with ICWA notice requirements; the juvenile court erred in finding notice adequate.
- The court rejected an unlimited reversal and instead ordered a limited (conditional) reversal.
- The order terminating parental rights was reversed solely to permit proper ICWA notice and compliance proceedings.
- On remand, if no tribe determines the child is an Indian child or seeks to intervene after proper notice, the juvenile court may reinstate the termination order without reopening other dependency findings.

## Legal Principles

- When the court knows or has reason to know a child may be an Indian child, ICWA requires notice to the relevant tribe(s) (or the Bureau of Indian Affairs) of the proceedings and the right to intervene.
- ICWA notice must be meaningful and include all known and reasonably obtainable identifying information about the child’s biological parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents sufficient to allow a tribe to assess membership or eligibility.
- A juvenile court’s ICWA nonapplicability finding is improper where tribal responses indicate they cannot make a determination because notice lacked necessary information.
- Under California Code of Civil Procedure § 43, appellate courts have discretion to tailor relief and may issue limited reversals that correct the specific procedural error while leaving other rulings intact unless ICWA is later found to apply.

## Conclusion

The court conditionally reversed the termination of parental rights because ICWA notice was defective, remanding only for proper notice and ICWA compliance; if tribes do not establish ICWA applicability after corrected notice, the termination order may be reinstated without relitigating other dependency issues.


In re Francisco W., 139 Cal. App. 4th 695, 43 Cal. Rptr. 3d 171 (Ct. App. 2006)