DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, ETC., PETITIONERS,
v.
IN THE INTEREST OF A.N., ET AL., RESPONDENTS
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 guardian ad litem may waive confidentiality protections under Florida Statutes sections 39.411(3) and (4) on behalf of minors in dependency proceedings, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in lifting a confidentiality order when disclosure was determined to be in the children's best interest.
A guardian ad litem has authority to waive statutory confidentiality protections on behalf of minors in dependency proceedings when such waiver is in the children's best interest.
[1] A guardian ad litem may waive statutory confidentiality protections afforded to minors in dependency proceedings under Florida Statutes sections 39.411(3) and (4) when su…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services sought certiorari review of a trial court order lifting confidentiality protections in a dependen…
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 Dependency Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court in the instant case, after considering the parents’ and guardians ad litem’s concurrence in a motion for the media to have full access to the instant proceedings, ordered an existing order of confidentiality lifted, thereby granting full access to the proceedings and records. The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100, applied for certiorari and we issued an order to show cause.
No reason has been advanced and we cannot find one that prohibits a guardian ad litem from waiving the benefit of sections 39.411(3) and (4), Florida Statutes (1991) of confidentiality on behalf of the minors.
Consequently, we conclude that the circuit court was acting within its discretionary powers when it determined that disclosure of the full record would best correct any speculation, rumor, or innuendo circulating about the instant family and that disclosure was in the best interest of the dependent children. See In re Adoption of H.Y.T., 458 So. 2d 1127 (Fla.1984); Investigation: Florida Statute 27.04, Subpoena of Roche v. State, 589 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), review denied, 599 So. 2d 1279 (Fla.1992); C.E.B. v. Birken, 566 So. 2d 907 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).
We find no abuse of discretion or deviation from the essential requirements of law, see Combs v. State, 436 So. 2d 93, 95-96 (Fla.1983); Wright v. Sterling Drugs, Inc., 287 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973), cert. denied, 296 So. 2d 51 (Fla.1974). The writ of certiorari is discharged and the application dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Combs v. State, 436 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 1983)
- Wright v. Sterling Drugs, Inc., 287 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)
- In re The Matter of the Adoption OF: H.Y.T. v. Smith, 458 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. 1984)
- State v. Hilding, 296 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 1974)
- Wright v. Sterling Drug, Inc., 296 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 1974)
- In re Investigation: Fla. Statute 27.04 v. State, 589 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Philip M. Warren, P.A. v. Arcara, 566 So. 2d 907 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)