J.H., THE MOTHER
v.
DEPT. OF CHILDREN & 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 cannot simultaneously terminate jurisdiction and order a party to complete case plan tasks, as termination of jurisdiction divests the court of authority to impose further obligations.
[1] A circuit court lacks statutory authority to terminate jurisdiction over a dependency case while simultaneously requiring a party to complete case plan tasks, as terminat…
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“the court lacked statutory authority to both terminate jurisdiction and order the mother to complete a case plan.”
Court's rationale for reversal, citing N.A. v. Dep't of Children & Families
Two fathers' motions to terminate protective supervision were granted; the Department's motion to adjudicate the children dependent was denied; protec…
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 Protective Supervision cases and more on FLexlaw
Thomasina F. Moore, Statewide Director of Appeals, and Laura J. Lee, Senior Attorney, Appellate Division, Statewide Guardian Ad Litem Office, Tallahassee, for Guardian Ad Litem.
PER CURIAM. The final order on appeal granted two fathers’ motions to terminate protective supervision, denied the Department’s motion to adjudicate the children dependent, terminated protective supervision, and terminated jurisdiction. Nonetheless, the order required the mother to complete additional case plan tasks. We agree with the Department’s concession that this case is controlled by N.A. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 267 So. 3d 430, 434 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019), because the court “lacked statutory authority to both terminate jurisdiction and order the mother to complete a case plan.” We reverse that portion of the order involving the mother and a case plan and remand to the circuit court to enter a new order, based on the evidence in the record, that is consistent with the best interest of the children.
GROSS, DAMOORGIAN and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.
* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.