ME v. FLA. DEPT. OF CHILD. & FAM. SERV.
| Decision Date | 24 March 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 97-1838.,97-1838. |
| Citation | 728 So.2d 367 |
| Parties | M.E., Appellant, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Greer Davis Wallace, Miami, for appellant.
Robin H. Greene, Miami, for appellee.
Before COPE, GODERICH and SHEVIN, JJ.
M.E. appeals an order terminating her parental rights with respect to three of her minor children, P.E., C.E., and S.E.1 We affirm.
Counsel was appointed to represent the mother, M.E., in this termination of parental rights ("TPR") proceeding. The case was scheduled for calendar call on June 24, 1996, and thereafter proceeded to trial in July.
Prior to the start of trial, the mother's counsel informed the court that she had experienced difficulty in contacting the mother and was not sure whether the mother knew of the actual trial date. Counsel explained that the mother wanted to defend against the petition for termination, and that counsel was prepared to proceed with the trial. The mother was also represented by a guardian, who had been appointed because of concerns about the mother's competency. Neither counsel nor the guardian requested a continuance to attempt to locate the mother. At the conclusion of trial, the court ruled that the mother's parental rights should be terminated.
The mother filed a motion for rehearing stating that she did not know of the trial date and wanted to testify at trial. She also alleged that a Department case worker knew her whereabouts, a point disputed by the Department. The trial court denied the motion for rehearing and the mother has appealed.
The mother contends that it was the responsibility of the Department to serve her personally with notice of the TPR trial date, even though counsel had been appointed for the mother. The mother's argument is incorrect.
Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.505(a) requires personal service of the petition for termination of parental rights along with notice of the date, time, and place of the advisory hearing.2 Thereafter, "[u]nless the court orders otherwise, every pleading, order, and paper filed in the action after the initial petition, shall be served on each party or the party's attorney." Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.225(c)(3) (emphasis added).
Where counsel has been appointed for the defendant parent, it is sufficient for notices, including the notice of trial, to be given to counsel. Notice to counsel is notice to the parent. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.060(m) (); State v. C.C., 633 So.2d 1114, 1115 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); State v. C.R.S., 584 So.2d 172, 173 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).
It is the responsibility of the parent to stay in reasonable touch with the attorney regarding the progress of the case and to advise the attorney of any change of address. Further, it is essential that the client provide counsel with some reasonably reliable means to contact the client when needed, whether it be at home, work, or some other point of contact. Prior to the hearing in this case, appointed counsel went physically to look for the mother at the mother's last known address, but she had moved. Certainly the client had a duty to advise the attorney of her change of address.
The mother argues that this court's decision in Gelatt v. State Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 585 So.2d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), requires personal service of notice of trial, but that is not so. Gelatt involved the failure to give any notice of trial at all. See id. It did not involve the situation now before us, where there was proper notice to the attorney, but a breakdown in communication with the client.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
RH v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILY SERVICES
...on M.A. v. Florida Department of Children & Family Services, 760 So.2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), and M.E. v. Florida Department of Children & Family Services, 728 So.2d 367 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), claims that the default and subsequent final judgment were proper. DCF argues that the father's "fai......
-
King-Coleman v. Geathers
...her current address. See W.K. v. Dept. of Children & Families, 832 So.2d 229, 232 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); M.E. v. Florida Dept. of Children & Fam. Servs., 728 So.2d 367 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). Accordingly, the order denying appellant's motion to vacate is FARMER and KLEIN, JJ., concur. FARMER, J.,......
-
MJW v. Department of Children and Families, 1D01-4074.
...proceeding must be personally served with the petition and notice of an advisory hearing. See M.E. v. Florida Dep't of Children & Family Servs., 728 So.2d 367, 368 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); see also J.B., 768 So.2d at 1065-67 (stating that twenty-four hours' notice of advisory hearing is insuffic......
-
N.L. v. Dept. of Children and Family Servs.
...938 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); M.A. v. Dep't of Children and Family Servs., 760 So.2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); M.E. v. Dep't of Children and Family Servs., 728 So.2d 367 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). None of these cases involve the service of initial DCF also argues that the mother's failure to appear at the......