J.S.
v.
DEPT. OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
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 trial court's dependency determination is upheld on appeal if the trial court applied the correct law and its ruling is supported by competent, substantial evidence.
[1] A trial court's determination of dependency will be upheld on appeal if the trial court applied the correct law and its ruling is supported by competent substantial evide…
[2] A party may waive an argument that a dependency case was not properly retransferred to a trial court by seeking affirmative relief in that court.
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“A trial court's determination of dependency is a mixed question of law and fact, which will be upheld on appeal if the trial court applied the correct law and its ruling is supported by competent substantial evidence.”
Standard of review for dependency determinations on appeal
The trial court entered a dependency order on October 10, 2017. Although the case had been transferred to Volusia County in June 2016, it was transfer…
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 Waiver Of Venue cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed February 28, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D17-2424 Lower Tribunal No. 16-15120
________________
J.S., the father,
Appellant,
vs.
Department of Children and Families, et al.,
Appellees.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Mavel Ruiz, Judge.
Law Offices of Roger Ally, P.A., and Roger Ally, for appellant.
Dickinson & Gibbons, P.A., and Jesse R. Butler (Sarasota); Thomasina Moore and Laura J. Lee (Sanford), for the Guardian ad Litem Program; Karla F. Perkins, for the Department of Children and Families.
Before SUAREZ, SCALES and LUCK, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the trial court’s October 10, 2017 dependency order because the trial court’s findings are supported by competent, substantial evidence. D.A. v.
Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 84 So. 3d 1136, 1138 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (“[A] trial court’s determination of dependency is a mixed question of law and fact, which will be upheld on appeal if the trial court applied the correct law and its ruling is supported by competent substantial evidence.”). While it does appear that, in June 2016, the trial court transferred this case to the circuit court in Volusia
County, see Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.205(b), the trial court docket and the court minutes reflect that the case was transferred back to the Miami-Dade County circuit court in November 2016, and that appellant waived any argument that the case was not properly retransferred to the Miami-Dade trial court when he, on several occasions,
sought affirmative relief in the lower court. D.M. v. J.D.M. ex rel. C.F., 814 So. 2d 1112, 1115-16 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (equating a rule 8.205(b) motion to transfer a dependency case with a motion to transfer venue); cf. Fixel v. Clevenger, 285 So. 2d 687, 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973) (“[T]he venue objection may be waived and if not timely or sufficiently asserted defendant must bear the consequences.”).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Fixel v. Clevenger, 285 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
- D.A. v. Dep't OF Child. & Fam. Servs., 84 So. 3d 1136 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)
- D.M. v. J.D.M, 814 So. 2d 1112 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)