IN THE INTEREST OF M.A., A MINOR CHILD

Fla. | 1992-12-03
No. 79566
BARKETT, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, SHAW, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.
609 So. 2d 597 Florida Supreme Court (1992) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
GRIMES, Justice.

[*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 REHABILITATIVE SERVICES MAY BE REVIEWED UNDER FLORIDA RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iii)?

We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4) of the Florida Constitution.

Upon the authority of Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Honeycutt, 609 So. 2d 596 (Fla.1992), we answer the certified question in the negative and approve the decision below.

It is so ordered.

BARKETT, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, SHAW, KOGAN and HARDING, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • A.P. and V.H. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 957 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)
    …on-final order removing the child from the custody [*687] of its parents and reinstating protective supervision of the child as a petition for writ of certiorari pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.040(c). See also In Interest of M.A., 609 So. 2d 597 (Fla.1992); Dep’t of Health & Rehab. Servs. v. Honeycutt, 609 So. 2d 596 (Fla.1992); S.H. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 950 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). Because notice of the evidentiary hearing that led to the order was both ineffective and…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw