R.G. v. Department of Children & Family Services

District Court of Appeal of Florida

R.G. v. Department of Children & Family Services

792 So. 2d 1269, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 12486, 2001 WL 1007953

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 5, 2001

DocketNo. 3D01-366

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 792 So. 2d 1269 (R.G. 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

R.G. v. Department of Children & Family Services, 792 So. 2d 1269, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 12486, 2001 WL 1007953 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. We find no merit in the assertion that the trial court’s order did not state the facts upon which the finding of dependency is based. Section 39.507(5), Florida Statutes (2000), requires the court to enter an order briefly stating the facts upon which its finding is based. See Castellanos v. Department of Health and Rehab. Servs., 545 So.2d 455, 458 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The trial court here provided ample facts to support its finding of dependency as to both children. Additionally, any due process concerns were never raised before the trial court and are therefore barred. See Hill v. State, 549 So.2d 179, 182 (Fla.1989). Furthermore, the Department was properly allowed to amend its pleading to conform with the evidence.

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

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. We find no merit in the assertion that the trial court’s order did not state the facts upon which the finding of dependency is based. Section 39.507(5), Florida Statutes (2000), requires the court to enter an order briefly stating the facts upon which its finding is based. See Castellanos v. Department of Health and Rehab. Servs., 545 So.2d 455, 458 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The trial court here provided ample facts to support its finding of dependency as to both children. Additionally, any due process concerns were never raised before the trial court and are therefore barred. See Hill v. State, 549 So.2d 179, 182 (Fla.1989). Furthermore, the Department was properly allowed to amend its pleading to conform with the evidence.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

792 So. 2d 1269, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 12486, 2001 WL 1007953, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rg-v-department-of-children-family-services-fladistctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack