IN THE INTEREST OF F.B., A CHILD

Fla. 5th DCA | 1988-12-08
No. 88-369
DAUKSCH and COWART, JJ„ concur.
534 So. 2d 899 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1988) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

A father appeals the trial court's dismissal of a dependency petition concerning his four-year-old daughter on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. The appellate court reversed, holding that circuit courts have exclusive jurisdiction over dependency proceedings regardless of internal judicial divisions or assignments.


Holding

The trial court erred in dismissing the petition for lack of jurisdiction. Circuit courts have exclusive original jurisdiction over dependency proceedings under Fla. Stat. § 39.40(2), and all circuit court judges have equal jurisdiction over child custody and dependency matters regardless of their assigned division.


Headnotes

[1] Circuit courts have exclusive original jurisdiction over dependency proceedings for children.

[2] The assignment of judges to different divisions within a circuit court does not limit a judge's jurisdiction over matters concerning child custody or dependency.

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

Key Quotes

“All circuit court judges have the same jurisdiction within their respective circuits. A judge in the probate division or the juvenile division or the civil division or the criminal division has the authority and jurisdiction to hear cases involving child custody or dependency.”

Establishes the foundational principle that internal court divisions do not limit judicial jurisdiction over dependency matters.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The father filed a petition alleging his four-year-old daughter was left unattended at her mother's home, subjected to sexual abuse by the mother and …

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.


Opinion of the Court
DANIEL, Judge.

DANIEL, Judge.

The father of F.B., a four year old child, appeals an order dismissing his petition seeking to have her declared a dependent child. The father alleged in his petition that the child had been left unattended at her mother’s home, that the child had been subjected to sexual abuse by the mother and the mother’s male live-in companion, that the mother had prevented the child from being examined by a doctor for suspected sexual abuse, and that the mother had greatly limited his visitation with the child.

The mother filed an answer denying misconduct and alleging that the father had failed to follow the trial court’s order concerning visitation rights. The mother also averred in her answer that the dependency petition was another attempt by the father to seek custody.

Following a hearing, the trial court entered its order, the pertinent portion of which stated:

After considering all information presented in this cause, the Court finds it is without jurisdiction.

IT IS THEREUPON ORDERED that this Petition be, and the same is hereby, dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and any further proceedings necessary in the best interest of the child will take place before Judge Waddell.1

The father contends that it was error for the trial court to dismiss his petition for lack of jurisdiction. We agree and reverse.

Section 39.40, Florida Statutes (1987) provides that jurisdiction over dependency proceedings lies in the circuit courts:

39.40 Procedures and jurisdiction.—

**

(2) The circuit court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction of a proceeding in which a child is alleged to be dependent and shall have jurisdiction for the judicial review, pursuant to part IV of this chapter, of a child voluntarily placed with a licensed child-caring agency, a licensed child-placing agency, or the department. When the jurisdiction of any child who has been found to be dependent is obtained, the court shall retain jurisdiction, unless relinquished by its order, until the child reaches 18 years of age.

In In the Interest of Peterson, 364 So. 2d 98 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978), our sister court explained that the circuit court has jurisdiction over all matters concerning the custody and welfare of children:

All circuit court judges have the same jurisdiction within their respective circuits. A judge in the probate division or the juvenile division or the civil division or the criminal division has the authority and jurisdiction to hear cases involving child custody or dependency. The inter nal operation of the court system and the assignment of judges to various divisions does not limit a particular judge’s jurisdiction.

364 So. 2d at 99.

In the present case, the father had the authority to initiate the petition and the trial court had jurisdiction over the child, the parents, and the subject matter. Accordingly, the order dismissing the dependency petition is reversed and the matter remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

DAUKSCH and COWART, JJ„ concur. . According to the record on appeal, Judge Waddell presided over the parties’ dissolution proceedings.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Willie v. State, 600 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
    …ion or the civil division or the criminal division has the authority and jurisdiction to hear cases in [*482] volving child custody or dependency.” In the Interest of Peterson, 364 So. 2d 98, 99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). See also In the Interest of F.B., 534 So. 2d 899 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) (judge assigned to juvenile division has jurisdiction to hear post-dissolution custody dispute); Grossman v. Selewacz, supra (judge assigned to civil division has jurisdiction to hear probate matter); In re Guardianship of Bentle…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw