M.S., NATURAL MOTHER OF D.W., APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, APPELLEE
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.
Florida appellate court affirmed termination of parental rights where mother failed to substantially comply with the case plan for 12 months after child was adjudicated dependent, rejecting her arguments that financial constraints and lack of understanding excused noncompliance.
Parental rights may be terminated under Fla. Stat. § 39.806(1)(e) when a parent fails to substantially comply with a case plan for 12 months after a child is adjudicated dependent.
[1] A parent's failure to comply substantially with a case plan for 12 months after a child is adjudicated dependent constitutes grounds for termination of parental rights under Fla. …
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceM.S., the natural mother of D.W., had her parental rights terminated by the trial court. The court found noncompliance with the case plan based on tes…
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 Case Plan Compliance cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, M.S., the natural mother of D.W., seeks review of a final judgment terminating her parental rights as to D.W. In the judgment, the trial court concluded that termination was appropriate under (1) section 39.806(l)(i), Florida Statutes (1999), because appellant’s parental rights to a sibling had previously been involuntarily terminated, and (2) section 39.806(l)(e), based on appellant’s failure to comply substantially with the case plan. Appellant challenges both bases for termination. We affirm as to the latter issue and, consequently, consider it unnecessary to address the former. It is undisputed that parental rights may be terminated pursuant to section 39.806(l)(e) if a parent fails to comply substantially with a case plan for a period of 12 months after a child is adjudicated dependent. The record in this case, particularly the testimony of Karen Pickett, the counselor who worked with appellant, provided competent, substantial evidence to support the findings of noncompliance as to the essential tasks required by the case plan.
Although appellant argues that her failure to conform with the case plan was caused by lack of financial resources, lack of understanding of the case plan’s terms, and the appellee’s failure to provide her with required services, the record contains competent, substantial evidence which supports the trial court’s contrary findings.
Because appellant has failed to establish on appeal that the trial court’s findings as to noncompliance are not supported by clear and convincing evidence, the judgment is
AFFIRMED.
ERVIN, VAN NORTWICK and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
A. H. v. Fla. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 85 So. 3d 1213 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…subjected [him] to aggravated child abuse.” Section 39.806(l)(e) Parental rights can be terminated when the record establishes that a parent did not comply with the essential tasks required by a case plan. See M.S. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 765 So. 2d 152, 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Under section 39.806(l)(e), termination of parental rights is allowable: When a child has been adjudicated dependent, a case plan has been filed with the court, and: 1. The child continues to be abused, neglected, or aban…
-
K.S. v. R.C., 766 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…rmination was KS.’s failure to substantially comply with her case plan over a long period of time — in excess of the twelve months specified, pursuant to section 39.806(1)(e), Florida Statutes (Supp.1998). See M.S. v. Dept. of Children and Families, 765 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); M.A.P. v. Dept. of Children and Families, 739 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). The court also found that termination was in the best interest of the child. In the Interest of A.R.S., 617 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). In this c…
-
J.T. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 800 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…e dependency stage, and appellant’s failure over the course of five [*342] years, to comply with her case plan, was an adequate basis to terminate her parental rights pursuant to section 39.806(l)(e). See M.S. v. Department of Children and Families, 765 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Further, the order of termination reflects that the trial court expressly considered all of the factors outlined in section 39.810, Florida Statutes (1998 Supp.). We conclude no error in the trial court’s finding that it was in…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence