IN THE INTEREST OF C. K. G., A/K/A C. G., AND J. W. G., JR., A/K/A J. G., MINOR CHILDREN
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial court erred by applying the preponderance of the evidence standard instead of the clear and convincing evidence standard in an adoption case.
The trial court permanently committed the appellant's children to the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services for adoption, finding the prepo…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Best Interests Of The Children cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order permanently committing the appellant’s children to the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services for the purpose of adoption.
The court resolved the conflicting evidence concerning the fitness of the appellant as a mother and the best interests of the children by holding that the preponderance of the evidence favored the Department. In so ruling we believe the court employed the wrong standard of proof.
The courts of Florida have consistently held in adoption cases that the evidence relied upon to permanently deprive parents of the custody of their offspring must be clear and convincing. Torres v. Van Eepoel, 98 So. 2d 735 (Fla.1957); Rose v. Rose, 128 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961); Roy v. Holmes, 111 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959); In re De Walt’s Adoption, 101 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958). Since the end result of proceedings under Section 39.11(d), Florida Statutes (1977), is the permanent severance of parental custody, the same standard should apply. Cf. Kersey v. State, 124 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960).
Accordingly, the judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded so that the court can decide the case upon the proper standard of proof. In reaching its conclusion the court may consider all evidence previously admitted as well as any further evidence which may be submitted on relevant events occurring since the last hearing.
GRIMES, C. J., and SCHEB and RYDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In the Interest of [C. M. H.], 413 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…nsent and joinder executed by the mother. The opinion states “the findings of the trial court that abandonment occurred under Section 39.41(l)(d) and 39.01(1) or 39.-ll(l)(d) are supported by clear and convincing evidence.” Citing Estate of C.K.G., 365 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). Comment: There must have been an adjudication at time of temporary custody order. Fact that it was based on consent does not make it less of an adjudication. Trial judge in this case must have held another adjudicatory hearing a…1 / 2
-
Solomon v. Donald L. McLUCAS et ux., 382 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)…it is of the utmost importance to bear in mind the standard of proof which must be met to establish an abandonment. This court has several times pointed out that abandonment must be shown by clear and convincing evidence. In the Interest of C.K.G., 365 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978); In re Adoption of Wilson, 328 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976); In re Adoption of Prangley, supra; Roy v. Holmes, 111 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959). We hold that the evidence in this case does not meet that standard of proof. As we…
-
In the Interest of J. F., 384 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…rity so as to develop any type of relationship with her child. The findings of the trial court that abandonment occurred under Section 39.-41(l)(d) and 39.01(1) or 39.11(l)(d) are supported by clear and convincing evidence. In re Estate of C. K. G., 365 So. 2d 424 (Fla.2d DCA 1978). This court in Kokay v. South Carolina Ins. Co., 380 So. 2d 489, 491 (Fla.3d DCA 1980) pointed out that: The well established principle of law is that where the words used and the grammatical construction employed in a statute ar…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- ROY v. Holmes, 111 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959)
- Ricketson v. Baessler, 98 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 1957)
- Annice A. Torres v. VAN Eepoel, 98 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 1957)
- In re Adoption of Phyllis Irene de Walt v. de Walt, 101 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)
- In the Interest of Richard Samuel Kersey v. Kersey, 124 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960)
- Rose v. Rose, 128 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961)