DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
The judiciary cannot compel an agency to spend funds beyond legislative appropriations or interfere with discretionary budgetary decisions.
HRS appealed a contempt order for failing to place a child in appropriate care and assume financial responsibility due to funding deficits.…
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 Contempt Of Court cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
HRS appeals from an order finding it in contempt of court for failing to place J.K. in an appropriate child care facility and failing to assume financial responsibility for such care. There was undisputed evidence presented below to the effect that Purchased Residential Treatment Services (PRTS) funding had been in a deficit situation for some time.
While we share the frustration of the trial court, we also recognize that the solution to these funding problems is legislative in nature, not judicial. We have held that it is not the judiciary’s role to revise legislative appropriations or to interfere with an agency’s discretionary budgetary decisions.1 Department of Health and Re habilitative Services v. V.L., 583 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), rev. denied, 591 So. 2d 185 (Fla.1991), citing State, Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Brooke, 573 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) with approval.
Accordingly, the order of contempt is hereby reversed.
REVERSED.
GRIFFIN, J., concurs.
GOSHORN, C.J., dissents without opinion.
. In addition, section 216.311, Florida Statutes (1991) forbids any state agency from willfully contracting to spend money in excess of the amount appropriated to such agency unless specifically authorized by law.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Boyt v. Romanow, 664 So. 2d 995 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)….13(l)(a) & (5) is to require that the guidelines be applied in all cases in response to a number of cases, including Huff v. Huff, 556 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Todes-co v. Todesco, 583 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); and Tmde.ll v. Williams, 593 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992), which hold that the guidelines, while helpful, are not to be applied automatically. See Final Bill Analysis & Economic Impact Statement of the House of Representatives Committee on Judiciary to CS/HB 707 (1993). In this opinion,…
-
Palm Beach Cnty. Sheriff v. State, 854 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…So. 2d 202 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (holding that the “trial court violated the separation of powers doctrine in considering the [Department’s] ability to move funds in order to comply with its mandate”); Dep’t of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. State, 593 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (observing that “it is not the judiciary’s role to revise legislative appropriations”). AFFIRMED. MAY, J., and DAMOORGIAN, DORIAN, Associate Judge, concur.…
-
In the Interest of R.V., 626 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…is mother. The order must be reversed because the state judiciary lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review discretionary acts of the executive branch affecting the use of state resources. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. State, 593 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (“it is not the judiciary’s role to review legislative appropriations to interfere with an agency’s discretionary budgetary decisions”); Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. V.L., 583 So. 2d 765, 767 (Fla. 5th DCA…
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 573 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- State v. The Honorable Alban Brooke of the Cir. Court of the Fourth Jud. Cir. In & For Duval Cnty., 573 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. V.L., 583 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)