ANNE FRANCES ANDERSON ALBERT, APPELLANT, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, 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 court affirmed the termination of parental rights and admonished appellant's counsel for lack of candor in misrepresenting the trial record by attributing a quotation to the court that did not exist.
Parental rights termination is affirmed where counsel's assertion of a quoted statement from the trial court cannot be supported by the record.
[1] Appellate counsel has an obligation to be candid and truthful in presenting factual statements to the court and must not attribute quotations to the record without verifi…
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 intelligence“Appellant's counsel is reminded of his obligation to be candid and truthful in his presentations and submissions to the court.”
Court's admonishment regarding counsel's duty of candor under Rules Regulating the Florida Bar.
Anne Frances Anderson Albert appealed a parental rights termination order. Her counsel cited a quotation attributed to the trial court in the initial …
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 Termination Of Parental Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
GOSHORN, Judge.
Anne Frances Anderson Albert appeals from an order terminating her parental rights. In the initial brief, Albert’s counsel placed quotation marks around a certain statement he attributed to the trial court, which statement, if true, might have indicated Albert’s entitlement to relief. Because this court was unable to find the quoted statement in the record provided, we ordered Albert’s counsel to supplement the record with the pertinent portion of the transcript. In response, Albert’s counsel retreated from his assertion that the quoted language was in the record, but contended that its contents may be inferred from one witness’s testimony. Our review of the record relied on by counsel shows that the witness simply could not remember the critical facts, and thus counsel’s assertion reflects his lack of candor with this court. Appellant’s counsel is reminded of his obligation to be candid and truthful in his presentations and submissions to the court. See R, Regulating Fla. Bar 4-3.3; Hays v. Johnson, 566 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), review denied, 576 So. 2d 287 (Fla.1991). See also St. Lucie Harvesting & Caretaking Corp. v. Cervantes, 639 So. 2d 37, 39 n. 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (admonishing counsel that “[ajppellate judges should not have to wonder, when reading factual statements containing words in quotes followed by-record references, what counsel intended.”).
AFFIRMED.
COBB and W. SHARP, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- ST. Lucie Harvesting & Caretaking Corp. v. Vicente Cervantes, 639 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Hays v. Johnson, 566 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)