IN THE INTEREST OF C.G., A MINOR
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.
The Wedderburns, adoptive parents of a dependent child's half-sister, appealed a dismissal of their petition to modify the child's foster placement. The court reversed, holding that the statutory term "interested person" in the dependency statute is broad enough to include the Wedderburns, and remanded for a hearing on the merits.
The court held that the statutory term "any other interested person" in section 39.41(l)(a)7 is broad enough to include persons such as the Wedderburns, and that the legislature intended to allow such persons to participate in placement proceedings, particularly given the statutory policy favoring maintenance of sibling groups.
[1] An "interested person" may petition for modification of a child's placement in a juvenile dependency proceeding.
[2] The term "interested person" in statutes governing child placement should be interpreted broadly to include individuals with a significant connection to the child's well-…
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“the legislature intended a broader meaning when it used the term "persons" as opposed to "parties" in section 39.41(l)(a)7”
The court's interpretation that the dependency statute's reference to "interested persons" is meant to be broadly construed
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceC.G. was born in 1991 to a mother who tested positive for cocaine and an incarcerated father. She was adjudicated dependent and initially placed with …
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 Juvenile Dependency Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Sonia and Lanceford Wedderburn appeal from a final order dismissing their petition to modify the placement of a minor child in a juvenile dependency hearing. C.G. was born in 1991 to a mother who tested positive for use of cocaine and to a father who was incarcerated in prison. C.G. was adjudicated dependent on December 17, 1991 and placed in the custody of a woman who was believed to be her paternal grandmother. HRS later learned that the alleged grandmother was not a relative and that the natural mother had fled with the child. HRS moved to modify the placement of C.G. and proceedings were initiated to terminate parental rights. In June 1992 the Wedderburns, the adoptive parents of C.G.’s natural half sister, filed a petition to intervene in the suit and asked that C.G. be placed with them as foster parents. HRS moved to have the Wedderburns’ petition dismissed on grounds that they lacked standing to petition for modification of placement under section 39.41(l)(a)7, Florida Statutes (1991) which provides:
(l)(a) When any child is adjudicated by a court to be dependent, the court having jurisdiction of the child shall have the power, by order, to:
7. Change the temporary legal custody ... A child who has been placed ... in some other place may be brought before the court by the agent of the department who is supervising the placement or by any other interested person, upon the filing of a petition which alleges a need for a change in the conditions of protective supervision or the placement, (emphasis added)
After hearing, the court granted HRS’ motion to dismiss the Wedderburns’ petition and ruled that they are not “interested parties.” The Wedderburns appeal and argue that rule 8.345(a), Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure, provides that “any interested person” may petition to modify placement:
(a) Motion for Modification of Placement. A child who has been placed in his or her own home, in the home of a relative, or in some other place, under the supervision of the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, may be brought before the court by the parent, guardian, or any interested person on a motion for modification of placement ...
The Wedderburns argue that the legislature intended a broader meaning when it used the term “persons” as opposed to “parties” in section 39.41(l)(a)7. We agree and reverse.
The legislature has set forth its intentions regarding the placement of siblings in section 63.022(1) of the Florida Adoption Act:
(1) It is the intent of the Legislature to protect and promote the well-being .of persons being adopted and their natural and adoptive parents and to provide to all children who can benefit by it a permanent family life, and, whenever possible, to maintain sibling groups, (emphasis added)
And the legislature has provided further guidance in section 39.45, Florida Statutes (1991):
When two or more children in foster care are siblings, every reasonable attempt shall be made to place them in the same foster home; in the event of permanent commitment of the siblings, to place them in the same adoptive home; and, if the siblings are separated, to keep them in contact with each other. We conclude, by interpolation, that the legislature intended to allow persons such as the Wedderburns to participate in placement proceedings. Our reading of the applicable case law supports this conclusion. See In the Interest of J.S., 404 So. 2d 1144 (Fla.1982); In the Interest of C.B., 561 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 5th DCA1990). We express no opinion as to the merits of the Wedder-burns petition and intend only to rule that they be given an opportunity to be heard.
REVERSED AND REMANDED, for further consistent proceedings.
HERSEY and WARNER, JJ., and WALDEN, JAMES H., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
I.B. and D.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 876 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…foster parents would directly gain or lose by the court’s rulings. Thus the foster parents have sufficient interest to warrant intervention in the litigation. See In the Interest of Z.J.S., 787 So. 2d 875 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); In the Interest of C.G., 612 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Even if the foster parents were not properly intervenors in these proceedings, they were already “participants” under Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.210(b) since they were the child’s foster parents.2 Under this rule, par…
-
C.C. v. Dep't OF Child. & Families, 732 So. 2d 1125 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…tition. As an interested person, the mother is entitled to have the trial court hear her petition, which essentially is a motion for modification of placement. See § 39.41(2)(a)9a, Fla. Stat. (1997) 1; Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.345(b); In Interest of C.G., 612 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Rumph v. Interest of V.D., 667 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). We trust the trial court will be mindful of section 39.41(4)(b), Fla. Stat. (1997),2 which provides that if no willing and able adult relative is located in the cours…
-
In the Interest of S.A.P., 623 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…remand to the trial court for further proceedings. We express no opinion as to the merits of the petition filed below and intend only to rule that appellant be given an opportunity to be heard in the trial court pursuant to In the Interest of C.G., 612 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). REVERSED AND REMANDED. ERVIN, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.…
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 J. S. v. Seekell, 404 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Garnette C. McMILLAN v. State, 561 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- In the Interest of C.B. and J.P., 561 So. 2d 663 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)