J.L. AND M.O., PETITIONERS,
v.
G.M., T.M., P.L., AND A.O., RESPONDENTS
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 court held that trial court orders allowing nonparties to intervene in a dependency proceeding were erroneous.
After a dependency petition was filed, the trial court granted motions to intervene by the child's maternal grandmother and maternal aunt and uncle.…
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 Parental Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We grant certiorari review of two orders that allowed nonparties to intervene in a dependency proceeding. After the petition for dependency was filed by the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services,1 the trial court granted motions to intervene filed by the child’s maternal grandmother and maternal aunt and uncle.
We have certiorari jurisdiction to review such orders because they pose a risk of irreparable harm to both the parents and the children. This could arise not only from interference with petitioners’ parental rights, but also with the actions deemed necessary by the Department to prevent risk to the child while the dependency case is pending. See Florida Dep’t of Health and Rehabilitative Servs. v. Doe, 659 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995), rev. denied sub nom. Doe v. Browns, 668 So. 2d 602 (Fla.1996).
Rule 8.210(a), Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure (1996), limits the parties to a juvenile proceeding. That rule provides:
(a) Definitions. For the purpose of these rules the terms ‘party’ and ‘parties’ shall include the petitioner, the child, the parent(s) of the child, the department, and the guardian ad litem, when appointed.
The trial court departed from the essential requirements of the law by allowing persons who do not fall within the definition of “par ties” to intervene. The granting of party status to these relatives was also contrary to Florida’s strong public policy against unwarranted interference with the parenting decisions of an intact family unit. Beagle v. Beagle, 678 So. 2d 1271 (Fla.1996).
The orders granting intervention are quashed. On remand, the trial court may consider whether the relatives should be granted nonparty participant status under rule 8.210(b), Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure.
STONE, POLEN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur. . Now the Department of Children and Family Services. Fla. L. ch. 96-403.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. In the Interest of B.D., 102 So. 3d 707 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…leaves the child’s status in a continuing state of uncertainty, subjects the child to the risk of harm, and requires immediate relief that cannot be provided at some uncertain future time on plenary appeal. See R.A., 980 So. 2d at 579; J.L. v. G.M., 687 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (granting certiorari review of orders that allowed non-parties to intervene in a dependency proceeding, contrary to the governing rule and public policy, where the orders posed a risk of irreparable harm to the parents and to the…
-
In the Interest of J.P. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs. Ad Litem Program, 12 So. 3d 253 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…court’s order should be quashed because the Maternal Grandmother could intervene as a participant in the dependency proceeding, but not as a party. The Department of Children and Family Services (DCF) correctly concedes error based on J.L. v. G.M., 687 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 4th DCA1997). A petition for writ of certiorari is appropriate to review an order granting a grandparent’s motion to intervene as a party in a dependency proceeding. Id. at 977. The jurisdictional requirements for certiorari review are met in…
-
Darrin McGILLIS v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 719 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…PER CURIAM. We affirm the order denying Mr. MeGillis’ motion to intervene as a party in a termination and dependency proceeding as he does not fall within the parameters of section 39.01(39), Florida Statutes (1997). See also J.L. v. G.M., 687 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)(Fla.R. Juv. P. 8.210(a) limits parties in juvenile proceeding). We note that the trial court properly recognized Mr. MeGillis as a “participant,” granting him the right to receive notice and to be heard in the proceeding. § 39.01…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Beagle v. Beagle, 678 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 1996)
- Fla. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. DOE, 659 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)