S.D., THE FATHER, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, 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 reversed a termination of parental rights order because no petition for termination was filed, which is required to invoke the trial court's jurisdiction.
A trial court lacks jurisdiction to terminate parental rights without a properly filed petition initiating the proceeding.
[1] Jurisdiction to terminate parental rights is invoked only by filing an original petition as required by statute and court rules; absence of a filed petition deprives the…
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“[a]ll proceedings seeking an adjudication to terminate parental rights pursuant to this chapter must be initiated by the filing of an original petition”
Statutory requirement under Florida Statute § 39.802(1) establishing that jurisdiction requires a filed petition
The father appealed an order terminating his parental rights to his son. Upon review, the appellate court discovered that no petition for termination …
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 Procedural Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw
WARNER, J.
In challenging the order terminating his parental rights as to his son, appellant claims that the trial court erred because no petition for termination was filed. Appellant is correct in that no petition appears in the record. To make sure that no petition was filed, we entered an order requiring the clerk to supplement the record with the petition, if one was filed. The clerk filed a response stating that no peti tion had been filed. Although the department contends that a petition must have been filed, it has not brought anything to our attention which would establish that it prepared and filed a petition which has simply been lost.
The jurisdiction of the court over a parent in a termination proceeding is invoked by the filing of a petition. See § 39.802(1), Fla. Stat. (“[a]ll proceedings seeking an adjudication to terminate parental rights pursuant to this chapter must be initiated by the filing of an original petition”); Fla. R. Juv. Pro. 8.500(a)(1) (“All proceedings seeking the termination of parental rights to a child shall be initiated by the filing of an original petition in the pending dependency action, if any.”) (emphasis supplied). Because the trial court’s jurisdiction was not properly invoked, we reverse. Our reversal is without prejudice to the department filing a new petition for termination of parental rights, properly invoking the jurisdiction of the court.
HAZOURI, J., and CHUMBLEY, DOUGLAS J., Associate Judge, concur.