R.S., THE MOTHER,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, ET AL.,
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 Florida Department of Children and Families sought to adjudicate a seven-month-old child as dependent due to corner fractures in both legs indicating child abuse. The trial court found the mother credible but, relying on medical expert testimony, adjudicated the child dependent based on child abuse and medical neglect. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the dependency ruling was supported by competent substantial evidence.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in adjudicating the child dependent. A dependency ruling is upheld when the trial court applies the correct law and the ruling is supported by competent substantial evidence, even when a sole caregiver is found credible but cannot explain a child's traumatic injuries.
[1] A trial court's dependency ruling will be upheld when the trial court applies the correct law and the ruling is supported by competent substantial evidence.
[2] Parents, as sole caregivers, may be unable to explain a baby's traumatic injury, which can be sufficient evidence to support a dependency ruling.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A trial court's dependency ruling will be upheld when the trial court applies the correct law and the ruling is supported by competent substantial evidence.”
Establishes the standard of review for dependency adjudications on appeal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA seven-month-old child, S.S., presented with corner fractures in both legs, an indicator of child abuse. The mother, R.S., shared sole caregiving res…
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 Child Dependency Adjudication cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The Florida Department of Children and Families filed a petition below seeking an order adjudicating seven-month old, S.S., dependent as to R.S., the child’s mother. X-rays of the baby revealed corner fractures in both legs, an indicator of child abuse. R.S., who shared sole caregiving responsibility with the father, could not explain the fractures. The trial court, in its December 12, 2019 Order of Adjudication, found R.S. to be credible.1 Nonetheless, in its detailed order, the trial court, relying on the testimony of the multiple medical experts who treated the child, found the child dependent pursuant to section 39.01(15)(a) of the Florida Statutes. Specifically, the trial court found that both child abuse and medical neglect occurred. See § 39.01(2), (35), (47), (50), Fla. Stat. (2019).
As we did in the father’s appeal of the dependency order directed toward him, see H.S.S. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, Case No. 3D20-91, 2020 WL 2464750 (Fla. 3d DCA May 13, 2020), we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion as to the mother. L.J. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 273 So. 3d 1123, 1124 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019). A trial court’s dependency ruling will be upheld when the trial court applies the correct law and the ruling is supported by competent substantial evidence. Y.P. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 939 So. 2d 1118, 1119 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); see J.V. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 967 So. 2d 354, 356
(Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (recognizing sufficiency of evidence to support dependency ruling when parents, the sole caregivers, cannot explain baby’s traumatic injury).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Y.P. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 939 So. 2d 1118 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
- J.V. v. Dep't OF Child. & Fam. Servs., 967 So. 2d 354 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
- L.J. v. Dept. of Children and Families, 273 So. 3d 1123 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)