R.P. v. Department of Children & Families

District Court of Appeal of Florida

R.P. v. Department of Children & Families

779 So. 2d 649, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 3242, 2001 WL 246000

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 14, 2001

DocketNo. 1D00-651

StatusPublished

This text of 779 So. 2d 649 (R.P. v. Department of Children & Families) 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.P. v. Department of Children & Families, 779 So. 2d 649, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 3242, 2001 WL 246000 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse in part the order and judgment under review and remand for a new hearing after proper notice is provided to the appellants. See Bembry v. Department of Children and Family Services, 716 So.2d 806 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1998). Because the appellants’ lack of notice was the only issue properly before this Court, the order and judgment at issue are only reversed to the extent they permanently terminate the appellants’ visitation rights, eliminate them as parties or participants, terminate their receipt of notices or reports, enjoin them from coming within 1,000 yards of any site where the grandchildren may be placed, and prohibit them from having any direct or indirect contact with their grandchildren. See Brago v. Brago, 604 So.2d 866, 867 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1992). This ruling is without prejudice to the trial court’s consideration of the merits of the issues reversed herein upon appellants receiving reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard.

REVERSED in part and REMANDED.

BOOTH, DAVIS and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse in part the order and judgment under review and remand for a new hearing after proper notice is provided to the appellants. See Bembry v. Department of Children and Family Services, 716 So.2d 806 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1998). Because the appellants’ lack of notice was the only issue properly before this Court, the order and judgment at issue are only reversed to the extent they permanently terminate the appellants’ visitation rights, eliminate them as parties or participants, terminate their receipt of notices or reports, enjoin them from coming within 1,000 yards of any site where the grandchildren may be placed, and prohibit them from having any direct or indirect contact with their grandchildren. See Brago v. Brago, 604 So.2d 866, 867 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1992). This ruling is without prejudice to the trial court’s consideration of the merits of the issues reversed herein upon appellants receiving reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard.

REVERSED in part and REMANDED.

BOOTH, DAVIS and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

779 So. 2d 649, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 3242, 2001 WL 246000, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rp-v-department-of-children-families-fladistctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack