IN THE INTEREST OF A.D.J. AND D.L.J., EACH A CHILD, APPELLEE
IN THE INTEREST OF A.D.J. AND D.L.J., EACH A CHILD, APPELLEE
586 So. 2d 451
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1991)
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The trial court did not err in denying the motion for recusal, Moser v. Coleman, 460 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), or in finding clear and convincing evidence to support the termination of appellant’s parental rights. In the Interest of D.J.S. and J.S.G., 563 So. 2d 655, 662 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (en banc). Accordingly, the order under review is affirmed.
BOOTH, WOLF and KAHN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- IN the Interest OF D.J.S. and J.S.G. v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 563 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Moser v. Honorable Ted P. Coleman, 460 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)