Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. A.N.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. A.N.

604 So. 2d 11, 20 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1743, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 8400, 1992 WL 185038

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 4, 1992

DocketNo. 92-1105

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 604 So. 2d 11 (Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. A.N.) 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

Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. A.N., 604 So. 2d 11, 20 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1743, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 8400, 1992 WL 185038 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court in the instant case, after considering the parents’ and guardians ad litem’s concurrence in a motion for the media to have full access to the instant proceedings, ordered an existing order of confidentiality lifted, thereby granting full access to the proceedings and records. The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100, applied for certio-rari and we issued an order to show cause.

No reason has been advanced and we cannot find one that prohibits a guardian ad litem from waiving the benefit of sections 39.411(3) and (4), Florida Statutes (1991) of confidentiality on behalf of the minors. Consequently, we conclude that the circuit court was acting within its discretionary powers when it determined that disclosure of the full record would best correct any speculation, rumor, or innuendo circulating about the instant family and that disclosure was in the best interest of the dependent children. See In re Adoption of H.Y.T., 458 So.2d 1127 (Fla.1984); Investigation: Florida Statute 27.04, Subpoena of Roche v. State, 589 So.2d 978 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), review denied, 599 So.2d 1279 (Fla.1992); C.E.B. v. Birken, 566 So.2d 907 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). We find no abuse of discretion or deviation from the essential requirements of law, see Combs v. State, 436 So.2d 93, 95-96 (Fla.1983); Wright v. Sterling Drugs, Inc., 287 So.2d 376 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973), cert. denied, 296 So.2d 51 (Fla.1974).

[12]*12The writ of certiorari is discharged and the application dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court in the instant case, after considering the parents’ and guardians ad litem’s concurrence in a motion for the media to have full access to the instant proceedings, ordered an existing order of confidentiality lifted, thereby granting full access to the proceedings and records. The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100, applied for certio-rari and we issued an order to show cause.

No reason has been advanced and we cannot find one that prohibits a guardian ad litem from waiving the benefit of sections 39.411(3) and (4), Florida Statutes (1991) of confidentiality on behalf of the minors. Consequently, we conclude that the circuit court was acting within its discretionary powers when it determined that disclosure of the full record would best correct any speculation, rumor, or innuendo circulating about the instant family and that disclosure was in the best interest of the dependent children. See In re Adoption of H.Y.T., 458 So.2d 1127 (Fla.1984); Investigation: Florida Statute 27.04, Subpoena of Roche v. State, 589 So.2d 978 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), review denied, 599 So.2d 1279 (Fla.1992); C.E.B. v. Birken, 566 So.2d 907 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). We find no abuse of discretion or deviation from the essential requirements of law, see Combs v. State, 436 So.2d 93, 95-96 (Fla.1983); Wright v. Sterling Drugs, Inc., 287 So.2d 376 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973), cert. denied, 296 So.2d 51 (Fla.1974).

[12]*12The writ of certiorari is discharged and the application dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

604 So. 2d 11, 20 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 1743, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 8400, 1992 WL 185038, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/department-of-health-rehabilitative-services-v-an-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack