In re Cattalini (1946) 72 Cal. App. 2d 662, construed a predecessor statute, Welfare and Institutions Code section 701, which provided in relevant part: "The jurisdiction of the juvenile court extends also to any person who should be declared free from the custody and control of either or both of his parents. The words 'person who should be declared free from the custody and control of either or both of his parents' shall include any person under the age of 21 years who comes within any of the following descriptions: (a) Who has been left by either or both of his parents in the care and custody of another without any provision for his support, or without communication from either or both of his parents, for the period of one year with the intent on the part of such parent or parents to abandon such person. Such failure to provide, or such failure to communicate for the period of one year, shall be presumptive evidence of the intent to abandon. Such person shall be deemed and called a person abandoned by the parent or parents abandoning him." (In re Cattalini, supra, 72 Cal. App. 2d at p. 665.) In re Cattalini addressed whether the children had been "left" by the father in the custody and care of the mother within the meaning of the statute when they were placed in the mother's custody by a court order. The court stated that to "leave" connoted a voluntary action. "Therefore, it may not be said that appellant left his children in the care and custody of the respondent when, by an order of the court, they were taken from the joint control of their parents and placed in the sole care and custody of the mother." (Ibid.) In re Cattalini followed precedent established by the Supreme Court which held that a judicial order taking custody of a child cannot support a finding of abandonment under section 7822, subdivision (a). ( Matter of Cozza, supra, 163 Cal. at p. 527.)