A.M. v. Department of Children & Family Services

8 So. 3d 1289, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 6993
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 29, 2009
DocketNo. 2D08-6133
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 8 So. 3d 1289 (A.M. v. Department of Children & Family Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
A.M. v. Department of Children & Family Services, 8 So. 3d 1289, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 6993 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

DAVIS, Judge.

A.M., the Father, challenges the trial court’s order adjudicating his four-month-old child, A.M., dependent. The Department correctly concedes error because the only evidence presented below to support an adjudication of dependency as to the Father was inadmissible hearsay. As such, the evidence presented below was insufficient, and we must reverse. See R.S. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 881 So.2d 1130, 1132 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (“[Rjeversal is required where the evidence is legally insufficient to sustain the findings of the trial court.”).

Reversed.

FULMER and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

D.S. Ex Rel. H.S. v. Department of Children & Families
42 So. 3d 865 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
In Re Am
8 So. 3d 1289 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 So. 3d 1289, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 6993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/am-v-department-of-children-family-services-fladistctapp-2009.