IN THE INTEREST OF M.A., A MINOR CHILD
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Florida Rule Of Appellate Procedure 9.130(A)(3)(C)(Iii) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We sua sponte dismiss this appeal of a non-final order in a dependency proceeding for lack of jurisdiction. In Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Honeycutt, 584 So. 2d 192 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), the fifth district differentiated issues of child custody in domestic relations matters and dependency proceedings under chapter 39, Florida Statutes, for review under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iii).
We agree that the words of limitation, “in domestic relations matters,” preclude our consideration of the instant case under the rule.
We note, as did the fifth district, conflict with In the Interest of Unknown P., 546 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). We also decline to consider the issue raised by way of our certiorari power. GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and GUNTHER, J., concur. STONE, J., concurs specially with opinion.
STONE, Judge,
concurring specially.
I concur in the opinion. However, I would also certify the issue to the supreme court rather than to simply note a conflict with The Interest of Unknown P. which is, at best, an uncertain conflict.
PER CURIAM.
We grant, in part, appellant’s motion for rehearing and amend our opinion filed December 4, 1991 to add the following:
WE CERTIFY TO THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT THE QUESTION: WHETHER A NON-FINAL ORDER IN A DEPENDENCY PROCEEDING TRANSFERRING CUSTODY OF A MINOR FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES MAY BE REVIEWED UNDER FLORIDA RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iii).
GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and GUNTHER and STONE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Honeycutt, 609 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 1992)…, and adoption. See Black’s Law Dictionary 484 (6th ed. 1990). In the context of appeals from nonfinal orders and rule 9.130, Florida courts have restricted the term to its historical meaning. R.J.B. v. State, 408 So. 2d 1048 (Fla.1982); In re M.A., 593 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); see C.L.S. v. State, 586 So. 2d 1173, 1175 n. 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Garcia v. Garcia, 560 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Kienzle v. Kienzle, 556 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Chase v. Chase, 519 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).…
-
Gleicher v. Claims Verification Inc., 908 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…ffective, so that it does not yet enjoin anyone. This court may raise jurisdictional deficiencies sua sponte, even when they are overlooked by the parties. See, e.g. Hi-Tech Mktg. Group, Inc. v. Thiem, 659 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); In re M.A., 593 So. 2d 521, 522 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). Claims Verification, Inc. (“CVI”), is engaged in the business of investigating insurance fraud. It previously employed Michael Gleicher, Jorge L. Hernandez, and Alexis DeAza. As a condition of their [*562] employment, Glei…
-
In the Interest of M.A., 609 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1992)…[*598] GRIMES, Justice. We review In re M.A., 593 So. 2d 521, 522 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), in which the court certified the following question as being of great public importance: WHETHER A NON-FINAL ORDER IN A DEPENDENCY PROCEEDING TRANSFERRING CUSTODY OF A MINOR FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIV…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In the Interest of Unknown P., 546 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Honeycutt, 584 So. 2d 192 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)