R.P. AND M.P., PATERNAL GRANDPARENTS, APPELLANTS,
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.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order awarding custody of a minor child to the father, while acknowledging the grandparents' affection and suggesting the father consider future visitation.
The appellate court affirmed the father's custody, holding that a fit father's legal right to custody should not be overcome by the mere fact that another party might offer more material benefits.
The maternal grandparents appealed an order awarding custody of their minor grandchild to the child's father. The grandparents sought custody or visit…
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 reverse in part the order and judgment under review and remand for a new hearing after proper notice is provided to the appellants. See Bembry v. Department of Children and Family Services, 716 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1998). Because the appellants’ lack of notice was the only issue properly before this Court, the order and judgment at issue are only reversed to the extent they permanently terminate the appellants’ visitation rights, eliminate them as parties or participants, terminate their receipt of notices or reports, enjoin them from coming within 1,000 yards of any site where the grandchildren may be placed, and prohibit them from having any direct or indirect contact with their grandchildren. See Brago v. Brago, 604 So. 2d 866, 867 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1992). This ruling is without prejudice to the trial court’s consideration of the merits of the issues reversed herein upon appellants receiving reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard.
REVERSED in part and REMANDED.
BOOTH, DAVIS and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Brago v. Brago, 604 So. 2d 866 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Bembry v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 716 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
- Slagle v. State, 716 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)