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

C.B. v. Department of Children & Families32 So. 3d 748 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) · 5D09-2485

Court
5th DCA
Decided
2010-04-20
Case
TPR
Appellant
Mother

Affirmed Termination affirmed on other grounds, but the out-of-home placements ground as to one child was struck because DCF never pleaded it.

Issues
TPR ground: three or more out-of-home placements Reversed, TPR: sufficiency of evidence, general Affirmed
Law cited
§ 39.806(1)

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

On CourtListener
PER CURIAM.

C.B., the mother, appeals the orders terminating her parental rights to her five children. We affirm in all respects, save one. As the Department of Children and Families (DCF) concedes, the trial court *749 erred by terminating the mother’s parental rights as to N.F. based on multiple out-of-home care placements, as set forth in section 39.806(1)(£), Florida Statutes (2008). This ground was not pled as a basis for termination in the petition and DCF failed to seek amendment of the petition to include this statutory ground as to N.F. See R.S. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 872 So.2d 412, 413 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Despite this error, the court properly terminated the mother’s parental rights as to all five children as other grounds supporting termination were adequately established. See J.C. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 959 So.2d 431 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (holding that despite error in termination order, which incorrectly included abandonment as basis for termination, termination order would still stand where DCF established two other grounds supporting termination).

On remand, the trial court shall strike this finding. In all other respects, the termination orders are affirmed.

AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED.

MONACO, C.J., ORFINGER and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.

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