IN RE GUARDIANSHIP OF TERRY P. BENTLEY, AN INFANT
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.
Marion Bentley Wall, the appointed guardian of six-year-old Terry P. Bentley, appealed an order transferring a custody petition filed by the Rankins from the Probate Division to the Juvenile and Family Division. The court held that the Circuit Court has unified jurisdiction over the matter and reversed the order requiring consolidation of the guardianship and custody proceedings.
The Circuit Court has unified jurisdiction over both guardianship and custody matters regardless of divisional assignment. The court reversed the Probate Division's order finding it lacked jurisdiction and remanded with directions to consolidate both cases for trial, with the Chief Judge authorized to designate which division shall hear the consolidated matter.
[1] A circuit court possesses inherent jurisdiction over all matters, and its divisions are administrative conveniences for case management.
[2] Judges of a circuit court are authorized to exercise the court's jurisdiction, regardless of the division to which they are assigned.
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“All of the judges of the Circuit Court are authorized to exercise that Court's jurisdiction. However, for efficiency in administration, the Circuit Court is frequently divided into divisions, with each division handling certain types of cases.”
Establishes that divisions are administrative conveniences, not jurisdictional limitations, and all judges may exercise the court's unified jurisdiction.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTerry P. Bentley's mother died and his father's whereabouts were unknown. On February 25, 1974, the Probate Division appointed Marion Bentley Wall (Te…
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 Guardianship cases and more on FLexlaw
DOWNEY, Judge.
Marion Bentley Wall is the grandmother of six year old Terry P. Bentley. On February 25, 1974, the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit appointed Marion as the guardian of Terry’s person and property (Terry’s mother had died and his father’s whereabouts were unknown).
A petition was filed in the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Juvenile and Family Division, by Ronald Rankin and Julia Rankin, his wife, (one of whom is Terry’s cousin) for custody of Terry looking toward his eventual adoption. The question then arose whether the Rankin custody petition should be heard in the Probate Division in conjunction with the guardianship proceeding or in the Juvenile and Family Division. Pursuant to a motion for a determination of jurisdiction the Judge of the Probate Division entered an order that the Probate Division had no jurisdiction and the issue involved should be determined by the “Civil Division” (meaning the Juvenile and Family Division). That order is the subject of this appeal.
We express some surprise that a matter of this magnitude could not have been resolved without resort to appellate procedures. The question involved is not one of jurisdiction. The Circuit Court has jurisdiction as prescribed by the Constitution and general law. See Article V, Section 5, Florida Constitution, and Section 26.012, Florida Statutes (1975). All of the judges of the Circuit Court are authorized to exercise that Court’s jurisdiction. However, for efficiency in administration, the Circuit Court is frequently divided into divisions, with each division handling certain types of cases. Judges and cases can both be transferred from one division to another by the Chief Judge of the Circuit. Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.020.
The appellant guardian contends on appeal that a decision of the Juvenile and Family Division that custody of Terry should be awarded to the Rankins would conflict with the order of the Probate Division appointing appellant as guardian of Terry’s person. Of course, such a situation is easily obviated by a consolidation of both cases for the purpose of trying the custody issue. Then, if the court determines Terry’s best interest would be served by granting custody to the Rankins, the court can simultaneously discharge Marion as guardian of Terry’s person.
Accordingly, we reverse the order appealed from to the extent that it holds the Probate Division has no jurisdiction to entertain the issue of custody. We remand the cause with directions to have the two pending cases consolidated for trial of the issue of custody and, if necessary, the Chief Judge of the Circuit can designate which division of the court shall try the issue.
REVERSED AND REMANDED with directions.
CROSS and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.