IN THE INTEREST OF K.V.Y., A MINOR. C.G., NATURAL MOTHER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
Termination of parental rights requires a prior adjudication of dependency; without it, the termination order is invalid.
The Department of Children and Families filed a petition to terminate parental rights for both parents. However, no order of dependency had been enter…
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 Dependency Adjudication cases and more on FLexlaw
PATTERSON, Chief Judge.
We do not reach the merits of this termination of parental rights case because procedural errors in the trial court require us to reverse.
The Department of Children and Families sheltered K.V.Y. on June 24, 1998, based on the allegation that K.V.Y. had been sexually molested by her father. A dependency action was then filed against both parents. A default was entered as to the mother on November 16, 1998. An order of adjudication of dependency was entered as to the father on January 20, 1999. No order of dependency was entered as to the mother. Notwithstanding, the Department sent a case plan to the mother, which she did not sign. On August 5, 1999, the Department filed a petition for termination of parental rights as to both parents. At trial, the court brought to the Department’s attention that there was no order of dependency as to the mother. The Department’s attorney responded, “I have one signed by Judge Mahoney as to the mother dated January 20,1999.... [B]efore I rest, get a certified copy of it included with the packet — .” The Department never produced the order. Nevertheless, the trial court terminated the mother’s parental rights.
The Department concedes the absence of the dependency order and suggests that we overlook it. We cannot do so.
As we said in In re T.R.F., 741 So. 2d 1184, 1186 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999):
[Pjarental rights may be terminated when the child has been adjudicated dependent, a case plan has been filed with the court, and the child continues to be abused, neglected, or abandoned by the parents. See § 39.464(l)(e). It is error to rely on a deficient dependency proceeding and related case plan as a basis for termination under this subsection.
The lack of an adjudication of dependency as to the mother is such a deficiency. We, therefore, reverse the mother’s termination of parental rights.
Reversed and remanded.
SILBERMAN, J., and CAMPBELL, MONTEREY, (Senior) Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
M.A. v. Dept. OF Children AND Families, 814 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…cted, or abandoned by the parents.” Although the statute does not specify whether an adjudication of depen [*1245] dency as to one parent is sufficient to satisfy a TPR of the other parent under this section, this issue was resolved in In re K.V.Y., 784 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). In that case, the child was adjudicated dependent as to the father but not the mother. The second district reversed the mother’s TPR, stating: As we said in In re T.R.F., 741 So. 2d 1184, 1186 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999): [ Pjarental ri…
Authorities Cited
- In the Interest of T.R.F. K.A.B. v. Fla. Dep't Of Child. & Families & Marilyn Miller ad Litem, 741 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)