J.W.S. v. G.H.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

J.W.S. v. G.H.

766 So. 2d 390, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 10075, 2000 WL 1109045

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 9, 2000

DocketNo. 1D99-3961

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 766 So. 2d 390 (J.W.S. v. G.H.) 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

J.W.S. v. G.H., 766 So. 2d 390, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 10075, 2000 WL 1109045 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

J.W.S., the natural father of G.P., appeals denial of his amended petition seeking custody of G.P., who had been placed in the temporary custody of her maternal grandparents after an adjudication of dependency. G.P. was adjudicated dependent at a time when she was not residing with J.W.S., who did not participate in the dependency proceedings before filing the petition seeking custody of G.P. J.W.S. is thus entitled to a determination whether placing G.P. with him “will endanger the safety, well-being, or physical, mental or [391]*391emotional health of the child.” § 39.508(8), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1998). If not, “the father would be entitled to custody once his ability to care for [G.P.] was established.” In re Guardianship of D.A. McW., 460 So.2d 368, 370 (Fla.1984).

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

BOOTH and BENTON, JJ., and SHIVERS, DOUGLASS B., Senior Judge, CONCUR.

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

PER CURIAM.

J.W.S., the natural father of G.P., appeals denial of his amended petition seeking custody of G.P., who had been placed in the temporary custody of her maternal grandparents after an adjudication of dependency. G.P. was adjudicated dependent at a time when she was not residing with J.W.S., who did not participate in the dependency proceedings before filing the petition seeking custody of G.P. J.W.S. is thus entitled to a determination whether placing G.P. with him “will endanger the safety, well-being, or physical, mental or [391]*391emotional health of the child.” § 39.508(8), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1998). If not, “the father would be entitled to custody once his ability to care for [G.P.] was established.” In re Guardianship of D.A. McW., 460 So.2d 368, 370 (Fla.1984).

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

BOOTH and BENTON, JJ., and SHIVERS, DOUGLASS B., Senior Judge, CONCUR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

766 So. 2d 390, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 10075, 2000 WL 1109045, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jws-v-gh-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack