Reinstatement of Reunification Services and Visitation In California

In In re D.S. (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 671, the father appealed after the court denied as untimely the mother's motion under section 388 which sought reinstatement of reunification services and visitation. In dismissing the appeal, the court of Appeal observed that "the ability to appeal does not confer standing to assert issues when he is not aggrieved by the order from which the appeal is taken." (Id. at pp. 673-674.) the court continued: "Standing to challenge an adverse ruling is not established merely because a parent takes a position on an issue that affects the minor; nor can a parent raise the minor's best interest as a basis for standing citation. Without a showing that a parent's personal rights are affected by a ruling, the parent does not establish standing. To be aggrieved or affected, a parent must have a legally cognizable interest that is affected injuriously by the juvenile court's decision. In sum, a would-be appellant 'lacks standing to raise issues affecting another person's interests.' to have standing appellant must show how the denial of a modification petition filed by the mother, which did not relate to appellant, and in which appellant did not join, affected his interests." (Id. at p. 674.)