CAROL FAVER, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
Carol Faver appeals the termination of her parental rights, arguing insufficient evidence of neglect, abuse, or abandonment and inadequate findings of fact. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirms the trial court's order, finding clear and convincing evidence supported the decision and that the trial court's findings were sufficiently detailed and specific.
The trial court's order was supported by clear and convincing evidence and included sufficiently specific and detailed findings. The order satisfied statutory requirements by listing factors considered under Florida Statutes section 39.467(2)(a)-(k) and documenting the services offered and Faver's failure to comply despite capability.
[1] A trial court's determination that evidence is clear and convincing will not be overturned on appeal unless, as a matter of law, no one could reasonably find such evidenc…
[2] A trial court's order terminating parental rights is supported by clear and convincing evidence when the record details the parent's unwillingness or inability to comply…
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“the trial court entered an order which was very specific and very detailed. The trial court listed the services that had been offered Faver and detailed her unwillingness to comply with requests of the service providers, although she was capable of performing these requests.”
Establishes that the trial court's findings were sufficiently specific and detailed, addressing the appellant's argument that findings merely tracked statutory language.
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 found that Faver was offered services but refused to comply with service providers' requests despite being capable of doing so. Faver …
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 Abuse cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, Judge.
Carol Faver appeals a final order terminating parental rights. We have jurisdiction. Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g)(3), 9.030(b)(1)(A). Faver argues that the trial court’s order is not supported by facts showing clear and convincing evidence of neglect, abuse or abandonment and that the trial court’s order does not include specific findings, but merely tracks the language of the Florida Statutes.
We disagree and affirm the entry of the order. In the case sub judice, the trial court entered an order which was very specific and very detailed.
The trial court listed the services that had been offered Faver and detailed her unwillingness to comply with requests of the service providers, although she was capable of performing these requests.
The trial court also detailed how Faver had not substantially complied with a performance agreement she signed, although she was capable of complying. In the Interest of J.R.C., 480 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985).
Cf. In The Interest of L.T., 464 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985) (a performance agreement is not a prerequisite in termination of parental rights eases where the child was placed in foster care and the permanent commitment was inevitable).
Clear and convincing record evidence supported the trial court’s decision to terminate parental rights and this decision will not be disturbed on appeal. See In the Interest of D.J.S., 563 So. 2d 655, 662 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (“a trial court’s determination that evidence is clear and convincing will not be overturned unless it may be said as a matter of law that no one could reasonably find such evidence to be clear and convincing”).
Further, we find the trial court’s order complied with section 39.467, Florida Statutes (1993). After the trial court conducted a disposition hearing, it entered an order which listed the factors that supported its findings. The trial court’s order shows that it considered all of the factors in section 39.467(2)(a)-(k), Florida Statutes (1993) in determining that severing parental rights was in the best interest of the child. Although the trial court could have set forth more findings supporting those grounds based on the numerous incidents that occurred during the ease, the trial court adequately set forth the grounds for termination and the facts supporting those grounds. We affirm the entry of the court order. AFFIRMED.
HARRIS, C.J., and COBB, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- IN the Interest OF D.J.S. and J.S.G. v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 563 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- In the Interest of L.T. and C.T. v. State, 464 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- In the Interest of J.R.C. and L.R.C. v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 480 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)