Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2011

DT v. Florida Department of Children and Families

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided February 24, 2011 · Kahn, Padovano, Clark

54 So. 3d 632; 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2445 (Southern Reporter, Third Series)

Cases that cite this one

10 later published cases cite this decision.

J.G. v. Dep't of Children & Families (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
J.G. v. Dep't of Children & Families (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
Bethencourt v. Bethencourt (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)
W. W. FATHER OF N. S. a child v. Guardian Ad Litem Program and Dept. of Children etc (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)
Turnier v. Stockman (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)
C.S.C-D. v. Department of Children & Families (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)
A.M. v. Department of Children & Families (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)
PENSACOLA BEACH PIER, INC. v. King (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)
DT v. Florida Department of Children and Families (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)
J.S. v. Florida Department of Children & Families (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this juvenile dependency case, the appellant seeks review of an order of the trial court denying her motion for reunification with her minor child, N.N. She argues that the case must be remanded, because the trial court failed to make the required findings under section 39.621(10), Florida Statutes and because there was no competent substantial evidence in the record to support the court’s conclusion that reunification would be detrimental to the child. We conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s ruling. As to the statutory findings, we are compelled to affirm, because the appellant failed to preserve this issue by a motion for rehearing or to otherwise bring the claimed deficiency to the attention of the trial court at a point when it could have been corrected. See Simmons v. Simmons, 979 So.2d 1063, 1064-65 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); Owens v. Owens, 973 So.2d 1169 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007).

Affirmed.

KAHN, PADOVANO, and CLARK, JJ„ concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.