J.W., FATHER OF K.W., J.L., AND C.H., CHILDREN, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, APPELLEE
J.W., FATHER OF K.W., J.L., AND C.H., CHILDREN, APPELLANT,
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, APPELLEE
812 So. 2d 599
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2002)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See State v. Osborne, 781 So. 2d 1137, 1139-40 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). (“With respect to time-limit statutes the general rule is, that requirements relating to the time within which an act must be done are directory rather than mandatory or jurisdictional, unless a contrary intent is clearly expressed ... a proper test of legislative intent is to focus on the likely consequences of holding a particular time limitation mandatory, in an attempt to as certain whether those consequences would defeat or promote the purpose of the enactment.”) (quoting People v. Curtis, 177 Cal.App.3d 982, 223 Cal.Rptr. 397, 399 (1986)).
SHARP, W., PALMER and ORFINGER, R. B., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Fla. Comm'n ON Human Relations & Mavis Georgalis, 842 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…ive intent is to focus on the likely consequences of holding a particular time limitation mandatory, in an attempt to ascertain whether those consequences would defeat or promote the purpose of the enactment. J.W. v. Dept. of Children and Families, 812 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (quotations and citations omitted). The legislative intent of the Whistle-blower’s Act is to prevent retaliatory action against employees who disclose misconduct on the part of public officials. Section 112.3187(2), Florida Stat…
-
M.T. and T.G. v. Dep't OF Child. & Families, 816 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…later than 30 days after the arraignment. This court has recently rejected the contention that the time periods contained in sections 39.506(1) and 39.507(l)(a) are jurisdictional speedy trial periods. In J.W. v. Department of Children & Families, 812 So. 2d 599, 27 Fla. L. Weekly D789 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) this court affirmed an order of the dependency court denying a motion to dismiss. The opinion states: AFFIRMED. See State v. Osborne, 781 So. 2d 1137, 1139-40 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). (“With respect to time-l…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Osborne, 781 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)