Jordan v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jordan v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services

579 So. 2d 331, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 4383, 1991 WL 75562

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 9, 1991

DocketNo. 90-02277

StatusPublished

This text of 579 So. 2d 331 (Jordan v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative 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

Jordan v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services, 579 So. 2d 331, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 4383, 1991 WL 75562 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from an order of disposition under Section 39.41, Florida Statutes (1989). We find the evidence adduced at the disposition hearing sufficient to support an adjudication of dependency as to both children. However, in the earlier appearance of this matter here, In the Interest of J.J. and J.J., both children, 570 So.2d 1078, 1079 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), this court held that the evidence adduced at the adjudication phase was insufficient to show the mother’s involvement in sexual abuse of the daughter by the mother’s “paramour/fiance.” We, therefore, must reverse the order of disposition as to the daughter.

We must also reverse the order of disposition as to the son, because the trial court had previously dismissed the petition for dependency as to the son at the adjudication hearing. The issue of the son’s dependency was therefore not before the court at the disposition hearing.

On remand, the court should direct the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services to file an amended petition as to both children conforming to the evidence adduced at the adjudication and disposition [332]*332hearings. See Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Hollis, 439 So.2d 947, 949 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). The trial court may consider the evidence already presented and any new evidence which the parties may offer.

BOOTH, SMITH and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from an order of disposition under Section 39.41, Florida Statutes (1989). We find the evidence adduced at the disposition hearing sufficient to support an adjudication of dependency as to both children. However, in the earlier appearance of this matter here, In the Interest of J.J. and J.J., both children, 570 So.2d 1078, 1079 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), this court held that the evidence adduced at the adjudication phase was insufficient to show the mother’s involvement in sexual abuse of the daughter by the mother’s “paramour/fiance.” We, therefore, must reverse the order of disposition as to the daughter.

We must also reverse the order of disposition as to the son, because the trial court had previously dismissed the petition for dependency as to the son at the adjudication hearing. The issue of the son’s dependency was therefore not before the court at the disposition hearing.

On remand, the court should direct the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services to file an amended petition as to both children conforming to the evidence adduced at the adjudication and disposition [332]*332hearings. See Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Hollis, 439 So.2d 947, 949 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). The trial court may consider the evidence already presented and any new evidence which the parties may offer.

BOOTH, SMITH and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

579 So. 2d 331, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 4383, 1991 WL 75562, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jordan-v-department-of-health-rehabilitative-services-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack