M.J., THE MOTHER
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
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.
M.J. appeals a final judgment terminating her parental rights to two children based on three statutory grounds. The trial court's termination is affirmed on two grounds but partially reversed and remanded because one ground was not properly pleaded in the petition, though the reversal does not affect the ultimate outcome.
The court affirmed termination on the first two statutory grounds and reversed and remanded the portion based on the third ground because it was not pleaded in the petition, violating due process. However, because two other statutory grounds independently support termination, the ultimate outcome is not impacted.
[1] Termination of parental rights based on a statutory ground not pleaded in the petition to terminate parental rights, not raised during opening statements, and not tried b…
[2] When a trial court terminates parental rights on multiple statutory grounds and one ground is invalidly pled, reversal of that ground is harmless error if other properly…
Previewing 2 of 2 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 a denial of due process to terminate parental rights based on a statutory ground not pled in the petition, not raised during opening statements, and not tried by consent”
Citing R.S. v. Dep't of Child. & Fams., 872 So. 2d 412, 413 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) for the rule that non-pled grounds violate due process
M.J. had her parental rights terminated by the trial court. The court based the termination on three statutory grounds under Florida law: continuing i…
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 Material Breach Of Case Plan cases and more on FLexlaw
Thomasina F. Moore, Statewide Director of Appeals, and Sara Elizabeth Goldfarb, Senior Attorney, Appellate Division, Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office, Tallahassee, for appellee Guardian ad Litem.
DAMOORGIAN, J.
M.J. (“the Mother”) appeals the final judgment terminating parental rights to her two children. The trial court terminated the Mother’s rights based on three statutory grounds: section 39.806(1)(c) (continuing involvement of the parent in the parent-child relationship threatens the child’s well-being irrespective of services); section 39.806(1)(e)1. (failure to substantially comply with the case plan); and section 39.806(1)(e)2. (material breach of the case plan), Florida Statutes (2019). We affirm on the first two statutory grounds without further comment. Because section 39.806(1)(e)2. was not raised as a basis for termination in the petition to terminate parental rights, we reverse and remand for the trial court to strike that portion of the order. See J.C. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 959 So. 2d 431, 431–32 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (reversing and remanding portion of final judgment that based termination of parental rights on a ground not pled); R.S. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 872 So. 2d 412, 413 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (holding that it is a denial of due process to terminate parental rights based on a statutory ground not pled in the petition, not raised during opening statements, and not tried by consent). However, since two other statutory grounds support termination, “the ultimate outcome of this case is not impacted by the need to correct this error.” R.S., 872 So. 2d at 413.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. LEVINE and KUNTZ, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- R.S. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 872 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- J.C. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 959 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)