C.T. v. Department of Children & Family Services

870 So. 2d 148, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 170, 2004 WL 57580
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 14, 2004·No. No. 2D03-2564·Published

Opinion

ALTENBERND, Chief Judge.

This is another case in which an order adjudicating a child dependent was entered based upon a “default.” The Department of Children and Family Services concedes error. For the same reasons that we reversed in K.K. v. Department of Children & Families, 862 So.2d 903 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), T.E.D. v. Department of Children & Families, 867 So.2d 405 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), S.B. v. Department of Children & Family Services, 858 So.2d 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), and G.A. v. Department of Children & Family Services, 857 So.2d 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), we reverse in this case. This opinion does not require the trial court to alter custody or current visitation rights, but the trial court must review these issues and make a lawful [149]*149decision as soon as possible following issuance of our mandate.

Reversed and remanded.

WHATLEY and CANADY, JJ„ Concur.

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

C.T. v. Department of Children & Family Services, 870 So. 2d 148, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 170, 2004 WL 57580 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

870 So. 2d 148 (C.T. v. Department of Children & Family Services) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

G.A. v. Department of Children & Family Services
857 So. 2d 310 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
S.B. v. Department of Children & Family Services
858 So. 2d 1184 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
K.K. v. Department of Children & Family Services
862 So. 2d 903 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
T.E.D. v. Department of Children & Family Services
867 So. 2d 405 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)