D.T., MOTHER OF M.M., A CHILD
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Mother D.T. appealed the termination of her parental rights to child M.M. The appellate court affirmed the termination but remanded for correction of scrivener's errors in the written judgment where the trial court cited incorrect statutory grounds in the written order despite correctly identifying them orally at trial.
The court affirmed the termination of parental rights but remanded for entry of an amended judgment to correct scrivener's errors and reflect the trial court's oral pronouncements regarding the appropriate grounds for termination.
[1] A written judgment terminating parental rights may be affirmed despite scrivener's errors if the trial court's determination is supported by competent substantial evidenc…
[2] A case may be remanded for the correction of scrivener's errors in a written judgment to accurately reflect the trial court's oral pronouncements.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the trial court's determination is supported by competent substantial evidence, and Mother fails to demonstrate reversible error as to those findings, we conclude the identified error is a scrivener's error”
Establishes the court's reasoning that the discrepancy constitutes a correctable scrivener's error rather than reversible substantive error
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDCF filed a petition to terminate Mother's parental rights, alleging grounds under three statutory provisions. At trial, the court orally found that D…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Scrivener'S Error cases and more on FLexlaw
Lynn James Hinson, of Guardian ad Litem, Orlando, for Guardian ad Litem Program.
SASSO, J.
D.T. (“Mother”) appeals the order terminating her parental rights as to M.M., challenging all three prongs required for termination of parental rights. 1 We affirm in all respects but remand for the trial court to correct scrivener’s errors in the written judgment, which Mother identified in her initial brief and the Florida Department of Children and Families (“DCF”) concedes require entry of a corrected order. In its petition, DCF alleged termination grounds under sections 39.806(1)(e)1., 39.806(1)(e)2., and 39.806(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2021), and at trial, the court orally found that DCF proved all three of those grounds by clear and convincing evidence. In its written order, however, the court identified the supporting grounds as sections 39.806(1)(e)1., 39.806(1)(e)2., and 39.806(1)(e)3., and made no mention of section 39.806(1)(c). Because the trial court’s determination is supported by competent substantial evidence, and Mother fails to demonstrate reversible error as to those findings, we conclude the identified error is a scrivener’s error. See, e.g., T.V.
v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 318 So. 3d 649, 650 (Fla. 5th DCA 2021) (remanding for correction of scrivener’s error where trial court’s order terminating father’s parental rights cited incorrect statutory ground for termination but correctly addressed the substance of each statutory ground and made the appropriate factual findings as to the termination of parental rights). 2 We therefore remand for the entry of an amended final judgment to reflect the court’s oral pronouncements as to the appropriate grounds for termination.
AFFIRMED and REMANDED with instructions.
HARRIS and TRAVER, JJ., concur. 3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
D.T. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 318 So. 3d 649 (Fla. 5th DCA 2021)…trial court’s determination is supported by competent substantial evidence, and Mother fails to demonstrate reversible error as to those findings, we conclude the identified error is a scrivener’s error. See, e.g., T.V. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 318 So. 3d 649, 650 (Fla. 5th DCA 2021) (remanding for correction of scrivener’s error where trial court’s order terminating father’s parental rights cited incorrect statutory ground for termination but correctly addressed the substance of each statutory ground an…
Authorities Cited
- D.T. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 318 So. 3d 649 (Fla. 5th DCA 2021)