In re K.A.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
880 So.2d 705 (2004)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
K.A. and S.A. (the couple) (defendants) were the parents of an infant and two other young children. Two weeks after the infant suffered serious injuries, the couple took the infant to a hospital. Hospital personnel found evidence of abuse and alerted Florida's Department of Children and Family Services (plaintiff). The department petitioned a court to terminate the couple's parental rights. Trial evidence showed the infant had been physically abused on numerous occasions. The couple implied that their oldest child caused the infant's injuries; however, the most credible evidence established that one of the parents abused the child and the other parent took no steps to prevent that abuse. The infant's injuries must have been immediately obvious to the parents, but they waited two weeks before seeking medical attention for the most recent injuries. Other evidence showed the older children were well treated. No evidence indicated that termination of the couple's parental rights was the least restrictive way to protect the older children's best interests. The children's guardian ad litem opposed terminating any of the couple's parental rights. Nevertheless, the judge terminated the couple's parental rights to all three children. The couple appealed to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Altenbernd, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.