Rule 5.483.Dismissal and transfer of case
Division 2. Rules Applicable in Family and Juvenile Proceedings · Chapter 2. Indian Child Welfare Act · Last amended 2020 · Last verified September 10, 2026
Full Text of Rule 5.483
Plain-English Summary
Two situations, two mechanisms. Where the court learns the child is already a ward of a tribal court or is domiciled or resides on a reservation of a tribe with exclusive jurisdiction, it must expeditiously notify the tribe and tribal court that it intends to dismiss, and on confirmation must dismiss and send the tribal court everything — pleadings and the state court record. If the local agency still has the child, the court must order physical custody transferred forthwith and hold the dismissal in abeyance until that is confirmed. None of this precludes an emergency removal to protect the child from imminent harm.
Where jurisdiction is concurrent, transfer is the default: unless the court finds good cause not to, it must order transfer if the parent, Indian custodian, or the tribe requests it. The request may be oral, in writing, or on the petition form, and an oral request must be documented in the record.
Good cause is narrow. Only two things constitute mandatory good cause to deny: a parent objecting in open court or in an admissible writing, or the tribal court declining. And five considerations are forbidden — socioeconomic conditions and the perceived adequacy of tribal social services or judicial systems; the advanced stage of the proceeding where the parent, custodian or tribe did not receive notice until then (and waiting until reunification services have been terminated is not, by itself, unreasonable delay); the absence of a transfer petition in earlier proceedings; the effect on the child’s placement; and whether the child has cultural connections with the tribe or its reservation.
The burden of establishing good cause is on the party opposing transfer, and any belief or assertion that good cause exists must be stated on the record or in writing in advance, with an opportunity to rebut it. Where a transfer is granted, the court must advise the parties orally and in writing that an appeal must be brought before the transfer is finalized, and that failing to obtain a stay will cost them appellate jurisdiction.
Advisory Committee Comment
The following comment is published by the Judicial Council of California alongside the rule itself — not commentary from this site.
Once a transfer to tribal court is finalized as provided in rule 5.483(h), the appellate court lacks jurisdiction to order the case returned to state court (In re M.M. (2007) 154 Cal.App.4th 897). As stated by the Court of Appeal in In re M.M., the juvenile court has the discretion to stay the provisions of a judgment or order awarding, changing, or affecting custody of a minor child “pending review on appeal or for any other period or periods that it may deem appropriate” (Code Civ. Proc., § 917.7), and the party seeking review of the transfer order should first request a stay in the lower court. (See Nuckolls v. Bank of California, Nat. Assn. (1936) 7 Cal.2d 574, 577 [61 P.2d 927] [“Inasmuch as the [L]egislature has provided a method by which the trial court, in a proper case, may grant the stay, the appellate courts, assuming that they have the power, should not, except in some unusual emergency, exercise their power until the petitioner has first presented the matter to the trial court.”].) If the juvenile court should deny the stay request, the aggrieved party may then petition this court for a writ of supersedeas pending appeal. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.112). Subdivision (g) and this advisory committee comment are added to help ensure that an objecting party does not inadvertently lose the right to appeal a transfer order.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a dependency case be transferred to tribal court?
Yes. Where state and tribal jurisdiction are concurrent, the court must order transfer on the request of a parent, Indian custodian, or the child’s tribe unless it finds good cause not to.
What counts as good cause to refuse a transfer?
Only two things are mandatory good cause: a parent objecting in open court or in an admissible writing, or the tribal court declining the transfer.
Can the judge refuse because the case is far along?
Not where the parent, Indian custodian, or tribe did not receive notice until an advanced stage — and waiting until reunification efforts have failed and services terminated is not, in itself, unreasonable delay.
What do I have to do to appeal a transfer order?
Appeal before the transfer to tribal jurisdiction is finalized, and obtain a stay. The court must advise the parties orally and in writing that failing to request and obtain a stay will result in a loss of appellate jurisdiction.
Amendment History
Rule 5.483 amended effective January 1, 2020; adopted effective January 1, 2008; previously amended effective January 1, 2013 and January 1, 2016.
(Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2020.) (Subd (C) amended effective January 1, 2020.) (Subd (d) amended effective January 1, 2020; previously amended effective January 1, 2013.) (Subd (e) relettered effective January 1, 2020; adopted as subd (f); previously amended effective January 1, 2013.) (Subd (f) relettered effective January 1, 2020; adopted as subd (g); previously amended effective January 1, 2016.) (Subd (g) relettered effective January 1, 2020; adopted as subd (h); previously amended effective January 1, 2016.) (Subd (h) relettered effective January 1, 2020; adopted as subd (h); previously relettered as subd (i) effective January 1, 2016.)