H.B., MOTHER OF N.C., A.B., E.S., AND S.S., ETC, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
The court held that the trial court's order adjudicating the children dependent was inadequate because it failed to set forth specific factual findings supporting the determination.
The Department of Children and Family Services filed a petition for dependency alleging abuse, abandonment, and neglect by the Mother. After a hearing…
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 cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, H.B. [“Mother”], whose four minor children1 were found to be dependent as to her, challenges that determina*310tion, asserting that the trial court failed to comply with the statutory requirement to set forth factual findings supporting a determination of dependency. She also contends that the evidence presented at the adjudicatory hearing was legally insufficient to sustain the trial court’s determination of dependency.
The Department of Children and Family Services [“DCF”] commenced this proceeding by sheltering the four children in July 2010, and later filing a petition for dependency, alleging that the children were abused, abandoned and neglected by Mother. After conducting a hearing, the trial court entered an order adjudicating the children dependent. In the order of dependency, under the heading, “Findings of Fact”, the trial court wrote: “The factual basis for the adjudication of dependency is as follows: as outlined on the petition for dependency and incorporated herein as if stated.” DCF properly concedes that this format is inadequate to meet the requirements of section 39.507(6), Florida Statutes (2010). We agree that the required findings of fact are inadequate and reverse on that basis.2
REVERSED and REMANDED.
ORFINGER, C.J., GRIFFIN and PALMER, JJ., concur.