J.B., MOTHER OF E.B. AND E.B., MINOR CHILDREN, DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, AND GUARDIAN AD LITEM PROGRAM, APPELLANTS,
v.
C.S., PETITIONER, M.B., FATHER OF E.B. AND E.B., MINOR CHILDREN, APPELLEES
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.
Florida appellate court affirmed termination of parental rights despite evidence of mother's improvement, holding that competent substantial evidence supported the trial court's findings that statutory grounds for termination existed, termination promoted the children's best interests, and termination was the least restrictive means to protect the children.
Where competent substantial evidence supports a trial court's clear and convincing findings of statutory grounds for termination, best interests of the child, and least restrictive means, the termination judgment will not be set aside on appeal.
[1] In parental termination cases, where a trial court's findings of clear and convincing evidence are supported by competent substantial evidence, an appellate court will no…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“it is not the function of this court to reweigh the evidence and substitute our judgment for that of the trial court.”
The court explained its limited appellate review role in parental termination cases, emphasizing deference to the trial court's factfinding.
J.B., the mother of minor children E.B. and E.B., appealed a final judgment terminating her parental rights and denying her motion for reunification, …
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 Least Restrictive Means cases and more on FLexlaw
In these consolidated appeals, J.B., the mother of minor children E.B. and E.B., appeals the final judgment terminating her parental rights and denying her motion for reunification. Despite the compelling testimony at trial concerning the mother’s marked, improvement and the passionate pleas for eventual reunification by the Department of Children and Families, the Guardian Ad Litem, and the parents, competent substantial evidence supports the trial court’s determination that statutory grounds for termination of parental rights exist, that termination promotes the children’s best interests, and that termination is the least restrictive means to protect the children from serious harm. See N.L. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 843 So.2d 996, 1000 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (“Where the trial court’s findings that the evidence is clear and convincing are supported by competent substantial evidence, and the appellate court cannot say that no one could reasonably find such -evidence to be clear and convincing, the-finding will not be set aside on' appellate review.”). While we may have decided this case differently had we been the trier of fact, “it is not the function of this court to reweigh the evidence and substitute our judgment for that of the trial court.” In the Interest of R.D.D., 518 So.2d 412, 415 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).
AFFIRMED.
WETHERELL, RAY, and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- N.L. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 843 So. 2d 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
- C.F. v. Dep't of Child. & Families (Fla. 1st DCA 2022)