IN THE INTEREST OF WENDY DEE PETERSON, A CHILD
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 Florida appellate court reversed a trial court's dismissal of a petition to declare a child dependent, holding that all circuit court judges have concurrent jurisdiction over child custody and welfare matters regardless of their divisional assignment, and that one judge's prior custody order does not divest another judge of jurisdiction to hear dependency proceedings.
The court held that the trial judge erred in dismissing the petition for lack of jurisdiction, as all circuit court judges have concurrent jurisdiction over child custody and welfare matters regardless of their divisional assignment, and one judge's prior custody order does not deprive another judge of jurisdiction to hear dependency proceedings.
[1] All circuit court judges possess the same jurisdiction within their respective circuits, regardless of the division to which they are assigned.
[2] A judge in any division of the circuit court has the authority to hear cases involving child custody or dependency.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“The circuit court has jurisdiction over all matters concerning the custody and welfare of children. All circuit court judges have the same jurisdiction within their respective circuits.”
Establishes the foundational principle that jurisdiction over child custody and welfare is vested in the circuit court generally, not limited by divisional assignment.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGrandparents petitioned the juvenile division of the circuit court to declare Wendy Dee Peterson a dependent child under Florida law. A different circ…
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 Petition For Change Of Custody cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This opinion revisits the matter we had before us In re Adoption of Wendy Dee Peterson, 344 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). The grandparents mentioned in that opinion have now suggested the child is a dependent child within the meaning of Section 39.01, Florida Statutes (1977) and seek to have the juvenile division of the circuit court declare her to be such a dependent child. When the petition was brought before the judge of the juvenile division of the circuit court he granted a motion to dismiss the petition. The order did not state a reason but the motion was grounded upon lack of jurisdiction and res judicata. The motion, which was filed by the natural father, said because another circuit judge of the same circuit, Jose A. Gonzalez, Jr., had entered an order in regard to the custody of the child and retained jurisdiction of the matter that this circuit judge had no jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter of the child’s dependency.
The circuit court has jurisdiction over all matters concerning the custody and welfare of children. All circuit court judges have the same jurisdiction within their respective circuits. A judge in the probate division or the juvenile division or the civil division or the criminal division has the authority and jurisdiction to hear cases involving child custody or dependency. The internal operation of the court system and the assignment of judges to various divisions does not limit a particular judge’s jurisdiction. Therefore the judge was in error when he dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction.1 See also, State ex rel. Hendricks v. Hunt, 70 So. 2d 301 (Fla.1954).
When Judge Gonzalez, on July 2, 1974, determined the proper custody of the child and retained jurisdiction to enter other orders for the welfare of the child he later found it necessary to change custody to the natural father on June 1, 1976 by way of Final Judgment. It is noted he did not retain jurisdiction to himself in that final judgment but, as stated earlier, the circuit court always has jurisdiction over the welfare and custody of children.
Because Judge Gonzalez is much more acquainted with the parties involved and because we are not here to try to control the inner workings and case management of the trial courts we deem it best and proper to reverse the order dismissing the petition and remand this matter to the trial court. However, hearing on the petition for dependency is stayed until a proper petition for change of custody is filed and heard.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
DOWNEY, C. J., and ANSTEAD, J., concur. . Of course when a judge acts in the juvenile division he acts under certain rules and statutes peculiar to that area of the law and a “juvenile judge” may have exclusive jurisdiction within the limited areas governing juveniles. State v. Robinson, 336 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976). That judge can act in the person of any judge of the circuit.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (21 total)
-
Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. B.J.M., 656 So. 2d 906 (Fla. 1995)…le division of the court which is organized to consider dependency and delinquency actions. The internal operation of the court system and the assignment of judges to various divisions does not limit the circuit court’s jurisdiction. In re Peterson, 364 So. 2d 98, 99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). “It is the court, and not the particular judges thereof, that has jurisdiction over a particular cause.... ” Willie v. State, 600 So. 2d 479, 481 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (citation omitted). [*911] Finally, we reject HRS’s conten…
-
Maugeri v. Plourde, 396 So. 2d 1215 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…her circuit and that the various divisions of that court operate in multi-judge circuits for the convenience of the litigants and for the efficiency of the administration of the circuits’ judicial business. See In the Interest of Wendy Dee Peterson, 364 So. 2d 98 (Fla.4th DCA 1978); and Guardianship of Bentley, 342 So. 2d 1045 (Fla.4th DCA 1977). Affirmed. . §§ 768.16-.27, Fla.Stat. (1977). . Under the provisions of Fla.R.App.P. 9.130(a)(5), we have accepted jurisdiction in this matter—filed with us as a…
-
Fort v. Fort, 951 So. 2d 1020 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…d in the family division, the circuit court also erred. As in Partridge, the former husband’s claim does not raise an issue of subject matter jurisdiction, but rather divisional jurisdiction within the circuit court. See In the Interest of Peterson, 364 So. 2d 98, 99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)(“AU circuit court judges have the same jurisdiction within their respective circuits.... The internal operation of the court system and the assignment of judges to various divisions does not limit a particular judge’s jurisdi…
Previewing 3 of 21 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Plant v. State, 336 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)
- State ex rel. Hendricks v. Hunt, 70 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 1954)
- In re Adoption OF Wendy Dee Peterson, 344 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)