C.J. AND E.J., IN THE INTEREST OF D.K.R., A CHILD, 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 court reversed the dismissal of a dependency petition because the trial court improperly considered unsworn allegations and failed to accept the petition's factual allegations as true when evaluating the motion to dismiss.
A motion to dismiss a dependency petition must be evaluated by accepting all factual allegations in the petition as true and construing them favorably to the filing party, and an unsworn motion to dismiss cannot support factual findings by the trial court.
[1] An unsworn motion to dismiss in a dependency proceeding must be evaluated by accepting all factual allegations in the petition as true and construing them favorably to th…
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 trial court must accept all factual allegations in the four corners of an initial pleading as true and must construe those facts in a manner favorable to the filing party when considering a motion to dismiss”
Standard for evaluating motions to dismiss in dependency proceedings
Appellants filed a Petition for Dependency regarding a child, and the trial court granted appellee's unsworn Motion to Dismiss the petition.…
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 Motion To Dismiss For Failure To State A Cause Of Action cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellants seek review of an order granting appellee’s unsworn Motion to Dismiss appellants’ Petition for Dependency. We reverse because the factual allegations contained within the four corners of the pleading, when construed in favor of appellants, are legally sufficient to prove dependency pursuant to section 39.01(15), Florida Statutes (2010). See Dep’t of Children & Families v. R.V., 917 So.2d 334 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (noting that motions to dismiss filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.235(b) are akin to motions to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action in civil proceedings); Locker v. United Pharm. Group, Inc., 46 So.3d 1126, 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (noting that a trial court must accept all factual allegations in the four corners of an initial pleading as true and must construe those facts in a manner favorable to the filing party when considering a motion to dismiss); C.J. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 756 So.2d 1108, 1110 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (finding Guardian Ad Litem’s report was inadmissible hearsay).*
REVERSED.
PADOVANO and ROWE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Locker v. United Pharm. Grp., Inc., 46 So. 3d 1126 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)
- C.J. v. Dep't OF Child. & Families, 756 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Dep't OF Child. & Families v. R.V. and S.V., 917 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)