D.Z. v. Department of Children & Family Services

District Court of Appeal of Florida

D.Z. v. Department of Children & Family Services

878 So. 2d 482, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 11343, 2004 WL 1698071

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 30, 2004

DocketNo. 2D03-4375

StatusPublished

This text of 878 So. 2d 482 (D.Z. 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

D.Z. v. Department of Children & Family Services, 878 So. 2d 482, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 11343, 2004 WL 1698071 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

D.Z. and D.P. (the Relatives), the maternal great-grandfather and the maternal grandmother, respectively, of D.A.G. and T.G., seek review of the trial court’s nonfi-nal order denying their motion for visitation. We do not have jurisdiction to review this nonfinal order as an interlocutory appeal. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.130(a)(3). However, we elect to treat the Relatives’ [483]*483timely filed notice of appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.040(c). We deny the petition. See Sullivan v. Sapp, 866 So.2d 28 (Fla.2004); A.D. v. KS. (In re S.D.), 869 So.2d 39 (Fla. 2d DCA2004).

Petition denied.

DAVIS, CANADY, and WALLACE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

D.Z. and D.P. (the Relatives), the maternal great-grandfather and the maternal grandmother, respectively, of D.A.G. and T.G., seek review of the trial court’s nonfi-nal order denying their motion for visitation. We do not have jurisdiction to review this nonfinal order as an interlocutory appeal. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.130(a)(3). However, we elect to treat the Relatives’ [483]*483timely filed notice of appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.040(c). We deny the petition. See Sullivan v. Sapp, 866 So.2d 28 (Fla.2004); A.D. v. KS. (In re S.D.), 869 So.2d 39 (Fla. 2d DCA2004).

Petition denied.

DAVIS, CANADY, and WALLACE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

878 So. 2d 482, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 11343, 2004 WL 1698071, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dz-v-department-of-children-family-services-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack