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

R.J. v. Guardian ad Litem Program993 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) · 5D07-3959

Court
5th DCA
Decided
2008-10-30
Case
Dependency
Appellant
Father

Certiorari / writ denied Treated as certiorari, the challenge to a non-final order changing the child's placement was denied because the best-interest findings were supported by the evidence.

Issues
Placement & ICPC, Certiorari: departure from the essential requirements of law
Law cited
§ 39.522(1) (now § 39.522(2))

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

On CourtListener
993 So.2d 176 (2008)

R.J., Father of D.J., a Child, et al., Appellant,
v.
GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM, Appellee.

No. 5D07-3959.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

October 30, 2008.

Carl S. New, Ocala, for Appellant, R.J.

Susan W. Fox, of Fox & Loquasto, P.A., Tampa, and Michael H. Hopkins, Wildwood, for Appellant Department of Children and Families.

Wendie Michelle Cooper, Orlando, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

R.J. and the Department of Children and Families filed a notice of appeal seeking *177 to challenge a non-final order changing the placement of R.J.'s son. Because there is no rule authorizing the direct appeal of this type of non-final order in a termination of parental rights case, see Guardian Ad Litem Program v. Department of Children and Families, 972 So.2d 871 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007), we treat the matter as a certiorari proceeding. In this case, the trial court found that the placement would be in the child's best interest, see section 39.522(1), Florida Statutes (2007), and the evidence supports the trial court's factual findings. Accordingly, we deny certiorari.

DENIED.

PALMER, C.J., LAWSON and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

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