Court Opinion

ID: 9572262
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:40:11.627144+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:32:12.206130
License: Public Domain

NEWMAN, J.
I concur. It does not appear that there has been a miscarriage of justice in this case. I do not agree, however, with the majority’s conclusion that it is “fair to presume from the judge’s approval of the [referee’s] order that the judge relied upon the same of similar reasons as those stated by the referee.”
The arguments that in recent years have persuaded the Legislature, this court, and other courts to insist that judges state reasons in analogous proceedings seem to me persuasive here. Further, to require that reasons be stated would often be more efficient and less time consuming than would a formal rehearing pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 252.
Tobriner, J., concurred.