IN THE INTEREST OF T.M., A CHILD. A.B., APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, AND GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM, APPELLEES

Fla. 2d DCA | 2010-08-06
No. 2D10-124
CASANUEVA, C.J., and KELLY, J., Concur.
40 So. 3d 928 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2010) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

A.B. appealed the termination of her parental rights to her son T.M. The appellate court reversed because the trial court failed to consider and make written findings regarding the child's manifest best interests as required by Florida statute, despite acknowledging it would do so at a subsequent proceeding that never occurred.


Holding

The court held that the trial court's failure to conduct a subsequent proceeding to consider the manifest best interests of the child and to enter written findings on the statutory factors constituted reversible error requiring reversal and remand.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court must consider the manifest best interests of the child in a hearing on a petition for termination of parental rights.

[2] Failure to consider or evaluate the statutory factors in determining the manifest best interests of the child is reversible error in parental rights termination proceedin…

Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“In a hearing on a petition for termination of parental rights, the court shall consider the manifest best interests of the child.”

This quote states the core statutory requirement from Section 39.810, Florida Statutes that the trial court must follow.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The trial court issued an order terminating A.B.'s parental rights to her son T.M. In the order, the court stated it would consider the manifest best …

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
WHATLEY, Judge.

WHATLEY, Judge.

A.B. appeals an order terminating her parental rights to her son, T.M. Both the Department of Children and Family Services and the Guardian ad Litem Program filed a concession of error, acknowledging that the trial court’s order must be reversed because the court failed to address the manifest best interests of the child. In the trial court’s order, it stated that the “court will consider the manifest best interest of the child at a subsequent proceeding.” In the Department’s concession of error, it notes that the trial court did not conduct a subsequent proceeding concerning the child’s manifest best interests.

Section 39.810, Florida Statutes (2009), provides as follows, “In a hearing on a petition for termination of parental rights, the court shall consider the manifest best interests of the child.” The statute notes eleven factors that a trial court must consider and evaluate in determining the manifest best interests of the child. See In re A.C., 751 So.2d 667, 669 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (“[i]n the absence of written findings, the final judgment does not satisfy the statutory requirement that the trial court consider and evaluate the manifest best interests of the children.”); In Interest of C.K., 601 So.2d 1331, 1331 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (holding that trial court’s failure to consider or evaluate the statutory factors in determining that termination of parental rights was in the manifest best interests of the child was reversible error).

Accordingly, we reverse the order terminating the Mother’s parental rights and remand with directions that the trial court conduct further proceedings to consider each factor in section 39.810 and enter a written order evidencing its findings.

Reversed and remanded.

CASANUEVA, C.J., and KELLY, J., Concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • In the Interest of E.R. and A.R. v. S.H. and F.R., 49 So. 3d 846 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
    …ess all of the statutory factors as it was required to do. See § 39.810 (providing that in a hearing on a TPR petition, “the court shall consider the manifest best interests of the child”) (emphasis added); A.B. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 40 So. 3d 928 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (reversing and remanding for further proceedings where trial court’s order failed to address manifest best interest factors on the basis that statute requires courts to consider and evaluate each factor and to enter á written orde…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw