S.B. v. State, Department of Children & Families

District Court of Appeal of Florida

S.B. v. State, Department of Children & Families

775 So. 2d 356, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13717, 2000 WL 1582766

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 25, 2000

DocketNo. 2D00-1529

StatusPublished

This text of 775 So. 2d 356 (S.B. v. State, 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

S.B. v. State, Department of Children & Families, 775 So. 2d 356, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13717, 2000 WL 1582766 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

S.B. challenges an order, which terminates her parental rights to her minor [357]*357child, A.B. The State concedes error with respect to S.B.’s dispositive claim that she was not effectively served with a termination petition and notice of an advisory hearing. We reverse.

Pursuant to section 39.801(3)(a)(1), Florida Statutes (1999), and Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.505(a)(1), a parent in a termination proceeding must be personally served with a petition and notice of an advisory hearing. See M.E. v. Department of Children & Family Servs., 728 So.2d 367, 368 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); see also J.B. v. Department of Children & Family Servs., 768 So.2d 1060 (Fla.2000) (stating that twenty-four hours’ notice of advisory hearing is insufficient to satisfy minimum due process requirements). The record here shows that, contrary to the statute and the rule, S.B. was served only by certified mail and only with a termination petition. Service was thus invalid.

Therefore, since the State correctly concedes error in this instance, and since this issue is indeed dispositive, we reverse the order terminating S.B.’s parental rights to A.B. and do not otherwise address the remaining two issues S.B. has raised on this appeal.

Reversed and remanded.

PATTERSON, C.J., THREADGILL and BLUE., JJ., Concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

S.B. challenges an order, which terminates her parental rights to her minor [357]*357child, A.B. The State concedes error with respect to S.B.’s dispositive claim that she was not effectively served with a termination petition and notice of an advisory hearing. We reverse.

Pursuant to section 39.801(3)(a)(1), Florida Statutes (1999), and Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.505(a)(1), a parent in a termination proceeding must be personally served with a petition and notice of an advisory hearing. See M.E. v. Department of Children & Family Servs., 728 So.2d 367, 368 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); see also J.B. v. Department of Children & Family Servs., 768 So.2d 1060 (Fla.2000) (stating that twenty-four hours’ notice of advisory hearing is insufficient to satisfy minimum due process requirements). The record here shows that, contrary to the statute and the rule, S.B. was served only by certified mail and only with a termination petition. Service was thus invalid.

Therefore, since the State correctly concedes error in this instance, and since this issue is indeed dispositive, we reverse the order terminating S.B.’s parental rights to A.B. and do not otherwise address the remaining two issues S.B. has raised on this appeal.

Reversed and remanded.

PATTERSON, C.J., THREADGILL and BLUE., JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

775 So. 2d 356, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13717, 2000 WL 1582766, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sb-v-state-department-of-children-families-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack