R.E.P., APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES AND THE GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM, APPELLEES
R.E.P., APPELLANT,
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES AND THE GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM, APPELLEES
961 So. 2d 989
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2007)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Based on the facts of this case, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying R.E.P.’s motion for continuance. See L.M. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 946 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). Therefore, we affirm the trial court’s order adjudicating J.S. dependent as to R.E.P. Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bechtel Corp. v. Batchelor, 250 So. 3d 187 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)…ce are duty, breach, harm, and proximate cause; the additional elements for a claim of premises liability include the defendant's possession or control of the premises and notice of the dangerous condition."). See also Solomon v. New ERA Meat No. 2, 961 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (citing Lisanti, 787 So. 2d at 37 ). While we review the denial of a motion for directed verdict or judgment as a matter of law de novo , we must view the evidence and all inferences in a light most favorable to Batchelor. Fasani…
Authorities Cited
- L.M. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 946 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)