C.S.C-D., MOTHER AND M.C., FATHER, ETC., APPELLANTS,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, APPELLEE
C.S.C-D., MOTHER AND M.C., FATHER, ETC., APPELLANTS,
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, APPELLEE
148 So. 3d 849
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2014)
Opinion of the Court
AFFIRMED. See A.M. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 118 So.3d 998, 999 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (“[I]f statutory deficiencies existed in the trial court’s order, *850Appellant needed to preserve these issues ‘by a motion for rehearing or ... [by otherwise bringing] the claimed deficiency to the attention of the trial court at a point when it could have been corrected.’ ” (quoting D.T. v. Fla. Dep’t of Children & Families, 54 So.3d 632, 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011))); R.B. v. Dep’t Children & Families, 997 So.2d 1216, 1218 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (citing Mathieu v. Mathieu, 877 So.2d 740, 741 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)).
PALMER, ORFINGER and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Mathieu v. Kris Mathieu, 877 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- Monfiston v. State, 54 So. 3d 632 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)
- D.T. Mother of N.N. v. Fla. Dep't of Child. & Families, 54 So. 3d 632 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
- R.B. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 997 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
- A.M. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 118 So. 3d 998 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)