2024 California Rules of Court
Rule 5.570. Request to change court order (petition for modification)
(a) Contents of petition (§§ 388, 778)
A petition for modification must be liberally construed in favor of its sufficiency. The petition must be verified and, to the extent known to the petitioner, must contain the following:
(1) The name of the court to which the petition is addressed;
(2) The title and action number of the original proceeding;
(3) The name and age of the child, nonminor, or nonminor dependent;
(4) The address of the child, nonminor, or nonminor dependent, unless confidential under (c);
(5) The name and address of the parent or guardian of the child or nonminor;
(6) The date and general nature of the order sought to be modified;
(7) A concise statement of any change of circumstance or new evidence that requires changing the order or, for requests under section 388(c)(1)(B), a concise statement of the relevant action or inaction of the parent or guardian;
(8) A concise statement of the proposed change of the order;
(9) A statement of the petitioner's relationship or interest in the child, nonminor, or nonminor dependent, if the petition is made by a person other than the child, nonminor, or nonminor dependent; and
(10) A statement whether or not all parties agree to the proposed change.
(Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2014; previously amended effective July 1, 2002, January 1, 2007, January 1, 2009, and January 1, 2010.)
(b) 388 petition
A petition under Welfare and Institutions Code section 388 must be made on form Request to Change Court Order (form JV-180).
(Subd (b) adopted effective January 1, 2007.)
(c) Confidentiality
The addresses and telephone numbers of the person requesting to change the court order; the child, nonminor, or nonminor dependent; and the caregiver may be kept confidential by filing Confidential Information (Request to Change Court Order) (form JV-182) with form JV-180. Form JV-182 must be kept in the court file under seal, and only the court, the agency, and the attorney for the child, nonminor, or nonminor dependent may have access to this information.
(Subd (c) amended effective January 1, 2014; adopted effective January 1, 2007.)
(d) Denial of hearing
The court may deny the petition ex parte if:
(1) The petition filed under section 388(a) or section 778(a) fails to state a change of circumstance or new evidence that may require a change of order or termination of jurisdiction or fails to show that the requested modification would promote the best interest of the child, nonminor, or nonminor dependent.
(2) The petition filed under section 388(b) fails to demonstrate that the requested modification would promote the best interest of the dependent child;
(3) The petition filed under section 388(b) or 778(b) requests visits with a nondependent child and demonstrates that sibling visitation is contrary to the safety and well-being of any of the siblings;
(4) The petition filed under section 388(b) or 778(b) requests visits with a nondependent sibling who remains in the custody of a mutual parent who is not subject to the court's jurisdiction; or
(5) The petition filed under section 388(c) fails to state facts showing that the parent has failed to visit the child or that the parent has failed to participate regularly and make substantive progress in a court-ordered treatment plan or fails to show that the requested termination of services would promote the best interest of the child.
(Subd (d) amended effective January 1, 2016; adopted as subd (b); previously amended and relettered as subd (d) effective January 1, 2007; previously amended effective January 1, 2010, and January 1, 2014.)
(e) Grounds for grant of petition (§§ 388, 778)
(1) If the petition filed under section 388(a) or section 778(a) states a change of circumstance or new evidence and it appears that the best interest of the child, nonminor, or nonminor dependent may be promoted by the proposed change of order or termination of jurisdiction, the court may grant the petition after following the procedures in (f), (g), and (h), or (i).
(2) If the petition is filed under section 388(b) and it appears that the best interest of the child, nonminor, or nonminor dependent may be promoted by the proposed recognition of a sibling relationship or other requested orders, the court may grant the petition after following the procedures in (f), (g), and (h).
(3) If the petition is filed under section 388(b), the request is for visitation with a sibling who is not a dependent of the court and who is in the custody of a parent subject to the court's jurisdiction, and that sibling visitation is not contrary to the safety and well-being of any of the siblings, the court may grant the request after following the procedures in (f), (g), and (h).
(4) If the petition is filed under section 778(b), the request is for visitation with a sibling who is not a dependent of the court and who is in the custody of a parent subject to the court's jurisdiction, and that sibling visitation is not contrary to the safety and well being of the ward or any of the siblings, the court may grant the request after following the procedures in (f), (g), and (i).
(5) For a petition filed under section 388(c)(1)(A), the court may terminate reunification services during the time periods described in section 388(c)(1) only if the court finds by a preponderance of evidence that reasonable services have been offered or provided, and, by clear and convincing evidence, that the change of circumstance or new evidence described in the petition satisfies a condition in section 361.5(b) or (e). In the case of an Indian child, the court may terminate reunification services only if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that active efforts have been made to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family within the meaning of sections 224.1(f) and 361.7 and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful. The court may grant the petition after following the procedures in (f), (g), and (h).
(6) For a petition filed under section 388(c)(1)(B), the court may terminate reunification services during the time periods described in section 388(c)(1) only if the court finds by a preponderance of evidence that reasonable services have been offered or provided, and, by clear and convincing evidence, that action or inaction by the parent or guardian creates a substantial likelihood that reunification will not occur. Such action or inaction includes, but is not limited to, failure to visit the child or failure to participate regularly and make substantive progress in a court-ordered treatment program. In determining whether the parent or guardian has failed to visit the child or to participate regularly or make progress in a court-ordered treatment plan, the court must consider factors including, but not limited to, the parent or guardian's incarceration, institutionalization, or participation in a residential substance abuse treatment program. In the case of an Indian child, the court may terminate reunification services only if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that active efforts have been made to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family within the meaning of sections 224.1(f) and 361.7 and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful. The court may grant the petition after following the procedures in (f), (g), and (h).
(7) If the petition filed under section 388(a) is filed before an order terminating parental rights and is seeking to modify an order that reunification services need not be provided under section 361.5(b)(4), (5), or (6) or to modify any orders related to custody or visitation of the child for whom reunification services were not ordered under section 361.5(b)(4), (5), or (6), the court may modify the orders only if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the proposed change is in the best interests of the child. The court may grant the petition after following the procedures in (f), (g), and (h).
(Subd (e) amended effective January 1, 2020; adopted as subd (c); previously amended and relettered as subd (e) effective January 1, 2007; previously amended effective January 1, 2010, January 1, 2014, and January 1, 2016.)
(f) Hearing on petition
If all parties stipulate to the requested modification, the court may order modification without a hearing. If there is no such stipulation and the petition has not been denied ex parte under section (d), the court must either:
(1) order that a hearing on the petition be held within 30 calendar days after the petition is filed; or
(2) order a hearing for the parties to argue whether an evidentiary hearing on the petition should be granted or denied. If the court then grants an evidentiary hearing on the petition, that hearing must be held within 30 calendar days after the petition is filed.
(Subd (f) amended effective January 1, 2016; adopted as subd (d); previously relettered as subd (f) effective January 1, 2007; previously amended effective July 1, 2002, and January 1, 2010.)
(g) Notice of petition and hearing (§§ 388, 778)
(1) If a petition is filed under section 388 or section 778 to terminate juvenile court jurisdiction over a nonminor, notice of the hearing must be given as required by section 295.
(2) For hearings on all other petitions filed under section 388 or section 778, notice of the hearing must be provided as required under section 297, or sections 776 and 779, except that notice to parents or former guardians of a nonminor must be provided only if the nonminor requests, in writing on the face of the petition, that such notice be provided, or if the parent or legal guardian is receiving court-ordered family reunification services.
Subd (g) amended effective January 1, 2019; repealed and adopted as subd (e); previously amended effective January 1, 1992, July 1, 1995, July 1, 2000, July 1, 2002; and January 1, 2014; previously amended and relettered as subd (g) effective January 1, 2007.)
(h) Conduct of hearing (§ 388)
(1) The petitioner requesting the modification under section 388 has the burden of proof.
(A) If the request is for the removal of the child from the child's home, the petitioner must show by clear and convincing evidence that the grounds for removal in section 361(c) exist.
(B) If the request is for termination of court-ordered reunification services, the petitioner must show by clear and convincing evidence that one of the conditions in section 388(c)(1)(A) or (B) exists and must show by a preponderance of the evidence that reasonable services have been offered or provided. In the case of an Indian child, the court may terminate reunification services only if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that active efforts have been made to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent the breakup of the Indian family within the meaning of sections 224.1(f) and 361.7 and that these efforts have proved unsuccessful.
(C) If the request is to modify an order that reunification services were not ordered under section 361.5(b)(4), (5), or (6) or to modify any orders related to custody or visitation of the child for whom reunification services were not ordered under section 361.5(b)(4), (5), or (6), the petitioner must show by clear and convincing evidence that the proposed change is in the best interests of the child.
(D) All other requests require a preponderance of the evidence to show that the child's welfare requires such a modification
(E) If the request is for visitation with a sibling who is not a dependent of the court, the court may grant the request unless the court determines that the sibling remains in the custody of a mutual parent who is not subject to the court's jurisdiction or that sibling visitation is contrary to the safety and well-being of any of the siblings.
(2) The hearing must be conducted as a dispositional hearing under rules 5.690 and 5.695 if:
(A) The request is for termination of court-ordered reunification services; or
(B) There is a due process right to confront and cross-examine witnesses.
Otherwise, proof may be by declaration and other documentary evidence, or by testimony, or both, at the discretion of the court.
Subd (h) amended effective January 1, 2020; adopted as subd (f); previously amended and relettered as subd (h) effective January 1, 2007; previously amended effective July 1, 2000, July 1, 2002, January 1, 2003, January 1, 2010, January 1, 2014 and January 1, 2016.)
(i) Conduct of hearing (§ 778)
(1) The petitioner requesting the modification under section 778(a) has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the ward's welfare requires the modification. Proof may be by declaration and other documentary evidence, or by testimony, or both, at the discretion of the court.
(2) If the request is for sibling visitation under section 778(b), the court may grant the request unless the court determines that the sibling remains in the custody of a mutual parent who is not subject to the court's jurisdiction or that sibling visitation is contrary to the safety and well-being of any of the siblings.
(Subd (i) amended effective January 1, 2016; adopted as subd (g); previously amended effective July 1, 2002; previously amended and relettered as subd (i) effective January 1, 2007.)
(j) Petitions for juvenile court to resume jurisdiction over nonminors (§§ 388(e), 388.1)
A petition filed by or on behalf of a nonminor requesting that the court resume jurisdiction over the nonminor as a nonminor dependent is not subject to this rule. Petitions filed under section 388(e) or section 388.1 are subject to rule 5.906.
(Subd (j) amended effective January 1, 2016; adopted effective January 1, 2014.)
(k) Petitions for juvenile court to exit and reenter jurisdiction over nonminors (§ 388(f))
This rule does not apply to a hearing on a petition for a nonminor to exit and reenter care to establish eligibility for federal financial participation under section 388(f). Those petitions may be decided with or without a hearing using mandatory forms Petition and Order to Exit and Reenter Jurisdiction-Nonminor Dependent (form JV-469) and Findings and Orders Regarding Exit and Reentry of Jurisdiction-Nonminor Dependent (form JV-471).
(Subd (k) adopted effective September 1, 2022.)
Rule 5.570 amended effective September 1, 2022; adopted as rule 1432 effective January 1, 1991; previously amended and renumbered as rule 5.570 effective January 1, 2007; previously amended effective January 1, 1992, July 1, 1995, July 1, 2000, July 1, 2002, January 1, 2003, January 1, 2009, January 1, 2010, January 1, 2014, January 1, 2016, January 1, 2019, and January 1, 2020.