Bembry v. Department of Children & Family Services

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bembry v. Department of Children & Family Services

709 So. 2d 1392, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6592, 1998 WL 299681

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 10, 1998

DocketNo. 97-1526

StatusPublished

This text of 709 So. 2d 1392 (Bembry 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

Bembry v. Department of Children & Family Services, 709 So. 2d 1392, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6592, 1998 WL 299681 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

On Confession of Error

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal of a final order in a dependency proceeding by Bernard and Mary Bembry, grandparents of the minor child. The order changed the goal of the case plan, placed the minor child with a different grandparent, terminated dependency supervision, and terminated all visitation rights of the appellant grandparents. The Department of Children and Family Services confesses error in that there was no written motion giving proper notice of the proceedings to the appellant grandparents, nor were they afforded an opportunity to be heard in the trial court proceedings. Accordingly, the order under review is reversed and the cause remanded for a new hearing after proper notice.

The appellant grandparents also point out that appointed counsel had withdrawn and that no substitute counsel had been appointed at the time of the hearing below. The question of appointment of counsel for further proceedings should be raised in the trial court on remand.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

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

On Confession of Error

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal of a final order in a dependency proceeding by Bernard and Mary Bembry, grandparents of the minor child. The order changed the goal of the case plan, placed the minor child with a different grandparent, terminated dependency supervision, and terminated all visitation rights of the appellant grandparents. The Department of Children and Family Services confesses error in that there was no written motion giving proper notice of the proceedings to the appellant grandparents, nor were they afforded an opportunity to be heard in the trial court proceedings. Accordingly, the order under review is reversed and the cause remanded for a new hearing after proper notice.

The appellant grandparents also point out that appointed counsel had withdrawn and that no substitute counsel had been appointed at the time of the hearing below. The question of appointment of counsel for further proceedings should be raised in the trial court on remand.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

709 So. 2d 1392, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6592, 1998 WL 299681, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bembry-v-department-of-children-family-services-fladistctapp-1998.