O.I., PETITIONER,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES, RESPONDENT

Fla. 4th DCA | 2001-07-05
No. 4D00-2918
GUNTHER, STONE and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
789 So. 2d 476 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2001)

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.


Holding

The court held that an order for paternity testing must be quashed if proper notice was not provided to the party.


Facts & Procedural History

The Department of Children and Families filed a petition to terminate parental rights. The trial court, on its own motion, ordered the father to submi…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

[*477] PER CURIAM.

The Department of Children and Families filed a petition to terminate O.I.’s parental rights.1 At a status/advisory hearing, the trial court on its own motion ordered 0.1. to submit to paternity testing. 0.1. filed an appeal from that order, which we treat as a petition for writ of certiorari. See Dep’t of Revenue v. Allen, 717 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).

While section 39.407(14), Florida Statutes (2000), allows the court to order such testing, that section provides that “[t]he order may be made only upon good cause shown and pursuant to notice and procedures as set forth by the Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure.” The record does nqt contain the notice of hearing, but the Department does not dispute O.I.’s claim that he had no notice that the subject of testing would be discussed at the status/advisory hearing. The lack of sufficient notice requires that the order be quashed. See F.M. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 758 So. 2d 1262 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).

We do not reach the question of whether good cause was shown in this case. If testing is considered again at a properly noticed hearing, the determination of good cause will have to be made anew.

GUNTHER, STONE and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur. . The petition was later voluntarily dismissed without prejudice.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw