In Interest of TGT, 433 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). · Go Syfert
Search
In Interest of TGT, 433 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
16 citation events (2 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: AG v. Department of Children and Families (fladistctapp, 1998-11-25)
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" AG v. Department of Children and Families
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See Interest of T.G.T., 433 So.2d 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (court may, on its own, initiate permanent commitment proceedings in a dependency proceeding if the parties receive proper notice); State, Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Serv. v. Hollis, 439 So.2d 947 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (following T.G.T. and holding that circuit court may initiate permanent commitment proceeding without violating separation of powers clause); and Migdal, 720 So.2d 568 , 23 Fla.L.
discussed Cited "see" Stefanos v. Rivera-Berrios (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Fla. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See In Interest of T.G.T., 433 So.2d 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).
cited Cited "see" Rivera-Berrios v. Stefanos
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1995 · signal: see · confidence high
See In Interest of T.G.T., 433 So.2d 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).
discussed Cited "see" In Interest of JM
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1986 · signal: see · confidence high
See In the Interest of T.G.T., 433 So.2d 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (where the circuit court on its own motion during a dependency proceeding ordered HRS to commence permanent commitment proceedings); State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Hollis, 439 So.2d 947 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (where the circuit court on its own motion, upon discovering the mother's failure to comply with a stipulation, ordered HRS to begin permanent commitment proceedings); and Padgett v. Pettis, 445 So.2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984) (where the circuit court's order awarding custody to the paternal grandparent…
cited Cited "see" In Interest of AB
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1983 · signal: see · confidence high
See In the Interest of T.G.T., 433 So.2d 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Green v. State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 412 So.2d 413 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Yh v. Flh
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2001 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., In re T.G.T., 433 So.2d 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (permitting mother of child who was permanently committed in a dependency proceeding to petition for adoption of her child upon rehabilitation); Green v. State Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 412 So.2d 413 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (holding that termination of the natural parents' rights by commitment proceedings does not foreclose their right to seek adoption pursuant to chapter 63, Florida Statutes (1979)). 673 So.2d at 13 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Y.H. v. F.L.H.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2001 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., In re T.G.T., 433 So.2d 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (permitting mother of child who was permanently committed in a dependency proceeding to petition for adoption of her child upon rehabilitation); Green v. State Dep’t of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 412 So.2d 413 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (holding that termination of the natural parents’ rights by commitment proceedings does not foreclose their right to seek adoption pursuant to chapter 63, Florida Statutes (1979)). 673 So.2d at 13 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Interest of T.G.T., a Child. STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, Appellant,
v.
Patricia STALEY, et al., Appellees.
AF-93.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Jun 1, 1983.
433 So. 2d 11
Mills.
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published

[*12] James A. Sawyer, Jr., Ocala, for appellant.

No Appearance for appellees.

MILLS, Judge.

The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) appeals an order finding T.G.T. to be dependent and directing HRS to begin permanent commitment proceedings.

T.G.T., now almost four years old, was left with a maternal aunt and uncle when one year old. The aunt and uncle were told they could keep the child. Except for an initial $40, the mother has not contributed to the child's support. The mother visited three times during the first six months of the child's stay with the aunt and uncle and has not visited the child since. Her current whereabouts are unknown. The father's identity is unknown.

HRS brought dependency proceedings which resulted in the appealed order. The issue before us is whether a circuit judge may on his own motion initiate permanent commitment proceedings in a dependency proceeding. We hold that the legislature has expressly given the circuit court this power and, therefore, affirm.

At the outset we observe that permanent commitment is an appropriate disposition under these facts, Interest of C.M.H., 413 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

Section 39.41, Florida Statutes (1981), sets out the power of the court after adjudicating a child dependent. Subsection 39.41(1)(f) provides that the court may order the permanent commitment of the child. This subsection standing alone would have authorized the actual permanent commitment of T.G.T. without further proceedings.

However, subsection 39.41(3), as well as due process, requires notice be given to a variety of interested persons. That notice was not given in the case before us.

We interpret the order below as requiring HRS to give the proper notice. Compare Interest of M.A.S., 398 So.2d 483 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). There is no doubt that the circuit judge acted properly in requiring that notice be given.

We are not convinced by HRS's "parade of horribles." Should T.G.T.'s mother become rehabilitated, she may petition for adoption. The permanent commitment will not prevent the adoption, Green v. HRS, 412 So.2d 413 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).

No HRS employee will be required to falsely swear to a personal belief that the commitment is in the child's manifest best interest. An allegation that the court has determined that permanent commitment is in the manifest best interest of the child will be sufficient.

AFFIRMED.

JOANOS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.