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

A.D. v. Department of Children & Families201 So. 3d 13 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) · 3D13-0800

Court
3rd DCA
Decided
2013-07-17
Case
TPR
Appellant
Father

Dismissed Appeal dismissed because the child's father, not a party to the mother's termination proceeding, lacked standing to challenge the termination of her rights.

Issue
Parties & standing

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

On CourtListener
SUAREZ, J.

The Appellant, A.D., as the father of Ke.Q., seeks to reverse the trial court’s final judgment terminating the parental rights of Ke.Q.’s mother. The Appellant argues that he was denied due process when the trial court refused to appoint counsel for him at the Mother’s termination of parental rights proceedings and as a result, he was also denied his right to be heard at her trial.

Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.146 permits “any parent ... to the proceeding affected by an order of the lower tribunal” to appeal the final judgment. (Emphasis added). “[I]ndividuals who were ‘not parties to the proceedings below,’ lack standing to bring an appeal.” *14R.H. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 994 So.2d 1153, 1155 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (quoting C.M. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 981 So.2d 1272, 1272 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)). The Appellant was not affected by the order of the lower tribunal terminating the Mother’s parental rights. Although the Appellant was a party to Ke.Q.’s dependency proceeding, he was not a party to the Mother’s termination of parental rights proceeding. Therefore, he lacks standing to seek reversal.

We dismiss the Appellant’s appeal for lack of standing.

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