C.B. v. Department of Children & Families

District Court of Appeal of Florida

C.B. v. Department of Children & Families

148 So. 3d 833, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 16936, 2014 WL 5304937

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 16, 2014

DocketNo. 5D14-2578

StatusPublished

This text of 148 So. 3d 833 (C.B. v. Department of Children & Families) 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

C.B. v. Department of Children & Families, 148 So. 3d 833, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 16936, 2014 WL 5304937 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

C.B., the father of the dependent child J.B., appeals a portion of the trial court’s disposition order, which requires him to engage in anger management counseling as part of his case plan. The Department of Children and Families correctly concedes error because the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that the father needs to participate in anger management counseling. See Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.410(b)(4) (“The case plan is meaningful and designed to address the facts, circumstances, and problems on which the court based its order of dependency for the child.”). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s disposition order, but strike the anger management counseling requirement from the father’s case plan. We remand for entry of an amended order/modification of the order.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED with directions.

ORFINGER, LAWSON and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

C.B., the father of the dependent child J.B., appeals a portion of the trial court’s disposition order, which requires him to engage in anger management counseling as part of his case plan. The Department of Children and Families correctly concedes error because the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that the father needs to participate in anger management counseling. See Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.410(b)(4) (“The case plan is meaningful and designed to address the facts, circumstances, and problems on which the court based its order of dependency for the child.”). Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s disposition order, but strike the anger management counseling requirement from the father’s case plan. We remand for entry of an amended order/modification of the order.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED with directions.

ORFINGER, LAWSON and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 So. 3d 833, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 16936, 2014 WL 5304937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cb-v-department-of-children-families-fladistctapp-2014.