J.S., MOTHER OF M.N., M.N., M.N., AND M.N., CHILDREN
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.
Mother appealed the circuit court's adjudication that her four children were dependent due to medical neglect and the inclusion of domestic-violence-related services in the case plan. The appellate court affirmed the dependency adjudication but vacated and remanded to remove domestic-violence-related services from the case plan because the court found the Department failed to establish domestic violence.
The court affirmed the adjudication of dependency for medical neglect, finding no abuse of discretion. However, the court vacated and remanded the portion of the case plan including domestic-violence-related services, as such services cannot be included without the predicate finding that domestic violence occurred.
[1] A case plan may include services related to a particular risk factor only when the trial court makes specific findings establishing that risk factor, and services address…
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“we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in adjudicating the children dependent due to medical neglect”
The appellate court's holding affirming the dependency adjudication based on medical neglect.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMother had four children who were the subject of a dependency proceeding. The circuit court adjudicated the children dependent based on medical neglec…
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 Medical Neglect cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
J.S. (“Mother”) appeals the circuit court’s adjudication of dependency for her four children, challenging both the court’s dependency determination and its inclusion of domestic-violence- related services in her case plan. Upon review of the record, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in adjudicating the children dependent due to medical neglect. Thus, we affirm the adjudication of dependency. However, because the court found that the Department of Children and Families failed to establish that there was domestic violence, we vacate and remand for the court to remove domestic-violence-related services from the case plan. See §§ 39.521(1)(c)1., .6012(1)(a), .603(1)(f), Fla. Stat. (2023); A.G. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 193 So. 3d 1097, 1100 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (per curiam); C.T. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fam. Servs. (In re G.S.), 84 So. 3d 1231, 1233 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). Our vacatur and remand are without prejudice for inclusion of domestic-violence- related services in an amended case plan should the court make the necessary predicate findings after further proceedings.
AFFIRMED in part; VACATED in part; REMANDED with instructions.
JAY, EISNAUGLE, and PRATT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- In the Interest of G.S. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs. & Guardian Ad Litem Program, 84 So. 3d 1231 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)
- A.G. v. Dep't OF Child. & Families & Guardian Ad Litem Program, 193 So. 3d 1097 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)