From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

M.M. v. Dept. of Children Families

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jun 23, 2006
931 So. 2d 280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

Opinion

No. 5D05-4110.

June 23, 2006.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County, S. Sue Robbins, Judge.

Diana Kilpatrick Simpson of Diana Kilpatrick Simpson, P.A., Ocala, for Appellant.

Ralph J. McMurphy, of Department of Children Families, Wildwood, for Appellee.

Patricia M. Propheter, Orlando, for Guardian Ad Litem.


AFFIRMED. K.B. v. Dep't of Children Families, 834 So.2d 368, 369 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (observing that "the `least restrictive means' test set out in Padgett v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 577 So.2d 565, 571 (Fla. 1991), is not intended to preserve the parental bonds at the cost of a child's future. . . . The `least restrictive means' test simply requires that measures short of termination be utilized if such measures would permit the safe re-establishment of the parent-child bond.") (citation omitted).

SHARP, W., THOMPSON, and MONACO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

M.M. v. Dept. of Children Families

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jun 23, 2006
931 So. 2d 280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)
Case details for

M.M. v. Dept. of Children Families

Case Details

Full title:M.M. Father of N.M., T.M., C.M., and B.M., Children, Appellant, v…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Jun 23, 2006

Citations

931 So. 2d 280 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

Citing Cases

F.L.C. v. G.C

However, the least restrictive means test is not intended to preserve the parental bonds at the cost of a…

Father v. Dept. of Children and Fam

AFFIRMED. See MM. v. Deft of Children Families, 931 So.2d 280 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); K.B. v. Deft of Children…