C. S.
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES AND GUARDIAN AD LITEM

Fla. 6th DCA | 2026-03-20
No. 2025-1902
2026 FL 3018 Florida District Court of Appeal, Sixth District (2026) Positive Treatment

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.

Synopsis

C.S. appealed the termination of her parental rights by a circuit court at the petition of the Department of Children and Families. The appellate court affirmed the termination, finding that the mother's appeal was insufficiently briefed and her issues were waived.


Holding

The appellate court affirmed the termination, holding that the mother's issues were insufficiently briefed and therefore waived because her half-page brief failed to apprise the court of material facts or points of law involved.


Headnotes

[1] An appellate court presumes the correctness of a trial court's decision, placing the burden on the appellant to demonstrate error.

[2] An appellant has a duty to brief a case by presenting material facts, points of law, and legal arguments to the court.

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

Key Quotes

“In appellate proceedings the decision of a trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error.”

Establishes the standard of review and burden on the appealing party

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

C.S., the mother of S.S., B.M.I., R.L.I., and R.MC., III, had her parental rights terminated by the circuit court following a petition by the Departme…

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.


Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

C.S., the Mother, appeals the termination of her parental rights on petition from the Department of Children and Families. We affirm.

"In appellate proceedings the decision of a trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error." Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979); see In re N.F., 82 So. 3d 1188, 1191 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). The appellant has a duty to brief a case so as to "acquaint the Court with the material facts, the points of law involved, and the legal arguments supporting the positions of the respective parties." B.T. v. Dep't of Child. & Fams., 300 So. 3d 1273, 1279 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020) (quoting Polyglycoat Corp. v. Hirsch Distribs., Inc., 442 So. 2d 958, 960 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)). Because her half-page brief does not apprise the Court of the material facts or the points of law involved, the Mother's issues are insufficiently briefed and therefore waived. See Coolen v. State, 696 So. 2d 738, 742 n.2 (Fla. 1997) (holding that issues not fully briefed and argued are waived); Lynn v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 81 So. 2d 511, 513 (Fla. 1955) (“It is elementary that when a decree of the trial court is brought here on appeal the duty rests upon the appealing party to make error clearly appear.").

AFFIRMED.

STARGEL, GANNAM and KAMOUTSAS, JJ., concur. C.S., Lake Placid, pro se.

Meredith K. Hall, Appellate Counsel, of Children's Legal Services, Bradenton, for Appellee, Department of Children and Families.

Sara E. Goldfarb, Statewide Director of Appeals, and Laura J. Lee, Assistant Director of Appeals, of Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office, Tallahassee, for Appellee, Guardian ad Litem.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw