Florida Dept. of Children and Fam. v. Fl

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “[t]he Legislature is presumed to know the judicial constructions of a law when amending that law, and the Legislature is presumed to have adopted prior judicial constructions of a law unless a contrary intention is expressed”
• stating that the Court has an obligation to construe a statute in a way that preserves its constitutionality
• noting that Padgett's least restrictive means requirement is constitutional in nature
• finding that a rebuttable presumption in the child welfare context meets the narrowly tailored requirement when the court has to find in each case that (1) there is a substantial risk of significant harm to the current child; and (2
• finding that a rebuttable presumption in the child welfare context meets the narrowly tailored requirement when the court has to find in each case that (1) there is a substantial risk of significant harm to the current child; and (2
• rejecting as unconstitutional a construction of section 39.806(1)(i), establishing a ground for termination when the parent's rights to another child have been involuntarily terminated, as creating a rebuttable presumption in favor of termination

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).