Dependency Law Finder

Florida's dependency statutes, court rules and DCF operating procedures, with the appellate opinions that apply them

data.robertlathamesq.org · All tools

Before you use this site

This site aggregates legal authorities from a variety of public sources. It is AI and human reviewed. Text processing errors can occur. Always check the information here against the official linked source.

This site is publicly available. Use for general research only. Do not submit confidential or identifiable case information.

I don't agree: show the official sources

K.S. v. Department of Children & Families136 So. 3d 1289 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) · 1D13-6161

Court
1st DCA
Decided
2014-05-12
Case
Dependency
Appellant
Mother

Reversed & remanded Dependency adjudication reversed because the court relied only on the father's consent, denying the mother's requested evidentiary hearing and giving no written findings.

Issues
Right to be heard & hearing procedure, Written findings & sufficiency of the order
Law cited
§ 39.507(7)(b)

Summary, issues, facts, outcome, and appellant were extracted automatically from the opinion. Check the opinion itself before relying on them.

On CourtListener
PER CURIAM.

The appellant, K.S., challenges an order adjudicating her children dependents of the state. We reverse.

At the arraignment hearing on the Department of Children and Families’ petition for dependency of the appellant’s children, the father entered a written consent to the dependency of the children. Although the appellant requested an eviden-tiary hearing on dependency consistent with the requirements of section 39.507(7)(b), Florida Statutes, the trial court did not conduct a hearing and issued a final order adjudicating the children dependent based only on the consent of the father without providing written findings. The appellees properly concede error in this ease.

We hold that the trial court’s order of dependency based only on the consent of

*1290the father without an evidentiary hearing and without written findings is contrary to the law. See Monteiro v. State, 477 So.2d 45, 45-46 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (holding that “consent to the dependency of a child by one parent does not affect the right of the other parent to continue in his or her parental role”). We, therefore, REVERSE and REMAND.

ROWE, MARSTILLER and SWANSON, JJ., concur.

Opinion text: CourtListener, Free Law Project. Not an official reporter; check the court's version before citing.