robertlathamesq.org

Category: Case Law Updates

  • What tasks can be in a case plan?

    Only tasks “[]relevant to the issue that resulted in the dependency and [] meaningfully designed to address the issue that resulted in [the child’s] removal from the home.” In re. G.S., — So. 3d. —-, 2012 WL 1193358 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2012). In this case, the dependency was based on the child’s lack of parent or…

  • Is drug court voluntary?

    Drug court is not voluntary. J.W. v. DCF, — So.3d —-, 2012 WL 1057637 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012).  

  • Oral Argument: Can you delegate visitation parameters to permanent guardian?

    My apologies for the technical difficulties: this is only audio.  Court: Florida Third District Court of Appeal Judges: Shepherd, Rothenberg, Emas Attorneys: Kevin Colbert for the Mother; Karla Perkins for DCF Issues: whether a permanent guardianship order can delegate the parental visitation parameters to the permanent guardian; DCF separately concedes that findings on this order…

  • Third DCA Rejects Fifth’s Interpretation of 39.507(7) – All Parents to be Treated Equally

    Furthermore, we reject DCF’s confession of error based on the Fifth District’s holding in P.S. that section 39.507(7) of the Florida Statutes prohibits a supplemental adjudication of dependency based on prospective abuse or neglect. In P.S., as here, the mother consented to DCF’s petition for dependency and the trial court entered an order adjudicating the children dependent. The father, however, challenged the…

  • Fifth DCA Says No Written Interrogatories in Dependency Cases

    Petitioner correctly contends that discovery in juvenile proceedings is governed by rule 8.245 and that the discovery tools authorized are limited. The rule permits production of documents and things for inspection and other purposes [rule 8.245(d) ], production of documents and things without deposition [rule 8.245(e) ] and depositions [rule 8.245(g) ]. The juvenile rules do allow for the use…

  • Third DCA Says that DCF Can’t Penalize RTI Recipients for Changing School Programs

    The Department’s interpretation of these provisions in connection with the renewal of Ms. Enich’s stipend altered the plain meaning of the statute. See Bennett v. St. Vincent’s Med. Ctr., Inc., 71 So. 2d 828, 841 (Fla. 2011). The Department imposed a more stringent set of requirements upon Enich than the statute actually requires. In concluding…

  • “The Department’s position amounted to nothing more than parroted statutory phrases”

    But even if the circuit court’s characterization were accurate, it could not serve as a legal basis for terminating N.F.’s parental rights. As mentioned, simply failing to complete a case plan, as such, is not ground for terminating parental rights. Rather, evidence of neglect or abuse can only be based on a failure to “substantially comply,” i.e., fail…

  • Dependency Plea Vacated Based on Permanency Goal Bait-and-Switch

    As a general rule, a party who receives notice of a disposition hearing will be found to have notice that the trial court may consider any and all disposition options authorized by law. However, in the instant case, the consent plea form recited that the plea was entered based on the understanding that the trial…

  • Third DCA Silent on GAL Replacement

    In KRL v. DCF,  the GAL Program replaced a volunteer GAL who objected to TPR for a staff GAL who supported it.  The issue was live at OA; but, in the written opinion, the Third DCA is silent about the substitution except for a footnote pointing out that GAL #2 had never seen the mother…

  • Who Pays for Expert Depos in TPR Cases?

    This case presents this question: As between two agencies funded by state government, which should bear the responsibility for an expert witness fee incurred in a deposition taken in a termination of parental rights proceeding? In the absence of any statutory direction, we hold that the Florida Rules of Juvenile and Civil Procedure apply to…