N.F., FATHER OF N.F. AND N.F., EACH 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.
A father challenged the termination of his parental rights to his two minor children. The Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's order, finding that competent and substantial evidence supported termination under the statutory ground that the father's conduct threatened the children's life, safety, and well-being.
The court affirmed the termination, finding that competent, substantial evidence supported the trial court's determination by clear and convincing evidence that the father engaged in conduct demonstrating that his continuing involvement threatened the children's life, safety, and well-being under section 39.806(1)(c), Florida Statutes. The court also affirmed that termination was in the best interest of the children and the least restrictive means of protecting them.
[1] Competent, substantial evidence supporting a trial court's finding by clear and convincing evidence of at least one statutory ground is sufficient for termination of pare…
[2] Conduct towards a child that demonstrates the parent's continuing involvement threatens the child's life, safety, well-being, or health, irrespective of services provided…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“engaged in conduct towards the child or children that demonstrates that the continuing involvement of the parent or parents in the parent-child relationship threatens the life, safety, well-being, or physical, mental, or emotional health of the child, irrespective of the provision of services.”
This is the statutory ground under section 39.806(1)(c), Florida Statutes, that the trial court found the father satisfied for termination of parental rights.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court terminated the father's parental rights to his two minor children based on findings that the father engaged in conduct demonstrating t…
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 Statutory Grounds For Termination cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, the father of two minor children, challenges the final order terminating his parental rights on two grounds. We affirm.
Our review shows that competent, substantial evidence supports the trial court’s finding by clear and convincing evidence that the Department proved at least one statutory ground, thereby complying with section 39.802(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2020). The ground proven was Appellant “engaged in conduct towards the child or children that demonstrates that the continuing involvement of the parent or parents in the parent-child relationship threatens the life, safety, well-being, or physical, mental, or emotional health of the child, irrespective of the provision of services.” § 39.806(1)(c), Fla. Stat. (2020).
Since the Department needed to prove only one ground for termination, we need not decide whether the trial court correctly determined that Appellant’s alcohol abuse satisfied section 39.806(1)(j), Florida Statutes, as an alternative ground. See § 39.802(4)(a); R.V. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 301 So. 3d 392 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020). Further, we affirm the trial court’s finding that termination is in the best interest of the children and was the least restrictive means of protecting the children. See J.P. v. Fla. Dep’t of Child. and Fams., 183 So. 3d 1198 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).
AFFIRMED.
ROBERTS, RAY, and BILBREY, JJ., concur. _____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
N.F. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 301 So. 3d 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022)…ground for termination, we need not decide whether the trial court correctly determined that Appellant’s alcohol abuse satisfied section 39.806(1)(j), Florida Statutes, as an alternative ground. See § 39.802(4)(a); R.V. v. Dep’t of Child. & Fams., 301 So. 3d 392 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020). Further, we affirm the trial court’s finding that termination is in the best interest of the children and was the least restrictive means of protecting the children. See J.P. v. Fla. Dep’t of Child. and Fams., 183 So. 3d 1198…
Authorities Cited
- J.P. v. Fla. Dep't of Child. & Families, 183 So. 3d 1198 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)
- N.F. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 301 So. 3d 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022)