JESSICA CLINGERMAN AND STEVEN CLINGERMAN
v.
J.F. MOTHER OF J.S., K.S. FATHER OF J.S., BELINDA HENDRIX, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES AND GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM
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.
Foster parents (Clingermans) sought to quash an order transferring custody of a child and an order striking their motion for rehearing. The appellate court granted the petition in part, finding the trial court erred in denying the Clingermans standing to file a motion for rehearing regarding their right to notice and an opportunity to be heard.
Yes, the trial court erred in striking the Clingermans' motion for rehearing. As foster parents, they had a statutory right to notice and an opportunity to be heard, and thus possessed standing to assert a violation of those rights.
[1] Foster parents have a statutory right to at least 72 hours' notice of hearings concerning children in their care.
[2] Foster parents have standing to assert a violation of their statutory right to notice and an opportunity to be heard in proceedings affecting a child in their care.
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“Because the trial court departed from the essential requirements of the law when it determined that the Clingermans lacked standing to file a motion for rehearing related to the court's May 6, 2019 change of placement order, we grant the petition.”
Establishes the appellate court's primary reason for granting the petition.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Clingermans, foster parents of a minor child (Child) since birth, sought to challenge a court order transferring custody to the child's maternal a…
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 Discretionary Rulings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM. Jessica and Steven Clingerman, foster parents of J.S. (Child), a minor, petition for a writ of certiorari. They seek to quash an order granting a motion to transfer custody away from them to J.S.'s maternal aunt, Belinda Hendrix, as well as an order striking certain of their filings for lack of standing. Because the trial court departed from the essential requirements of the law when it determined that the Clingermans lacked standing to file a motion for rehearing related to the court's May 6, 2019 change of placement order, we grant the petition. In all other respects, the petition is denied. Child was sheltered shortly after birth and immediately placed in foster care with the Clingermans. Child has remained in the Clingermans' care his entire life.1 In February 2019, the Department of Children and Families filed a petition for involuntary termination of the rights of both natural parents and, soon thereafter, the natural mother moved to change Child’s placement from the Clingermans to the maternal aunt. The trial court granted the motion. Based, in part, on the fact that they were not provided adequate notice or given an opportunity to be heard at the hearing on the motion for change of placement, the Clingermans moved for rehearing. However, the trial court determined that the Clingermans lacked standing and struck their motion. Because the motion for rehearing sought to assert the Clingermans’ clear statutory right to notice and an opportunity to be heard, it was error to strike the motion. See § 39.502(17), Fla. Stat. (2018). Section 39.502(17) provides:
The parent or legal custodian of the child, the attorney for the department, the guardian ad litem, the foster or preadoptive parents, and all other parties and participants shall be given reasonable notice of all proceedings and hearings provided for under this part. All foster or preadoptive parents must be provided with at least 72 hours' notice, verbally or in writing, of all proceedings or hearings relating to children in their care or children they are seeking to adopt to ensure the ability to provide input to the court.
(Emphasis added). Applying the plain language of the statute, the Clingermans had a statutory right to seventy-two-hours notice of the hearing underlying the May 6, 2019 change of placement order.2 As such, they had standing to assert a violation of their right to adequate notice in this case, and the trial court departed from clearly established law when it decided otherwise.3 We, therefore, quash the order under review striking the motion for rehearing and direct that Child remain in the Clingermans' custody until such time as the trial court considers the motion.
PETITION GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part.
BERGER, WALLIS and HARRIS, JJ., concur. 2 The Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure require that in dependency and termination proceedings, "[p]articipants may be granted leave by the court to be heard without the necessity of filing a motion to intervene . . . ." Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.210(b). "Participants include foster parents. . . ." Id. "It is the duty of the petitioner or moving party to notify . . . all participants, including foster parents . . . of all hearings, except hearings which must be noticed by the court." Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.225(f)(3).