Jamal Ladariur Dortch v. State of Florida

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that only parties to a dependency proceeding have the right to argue their own interests, introduce evidence, and/or cross-examine witnesses
• establishing that “prospective adoptive parents have standing to contest the child welfare agency’s decision to remove a child it placed with them in anticipation for adoption[]”
• explaining that this exception permits “the limited participation” of prospective adoptive parents in a dependency matter “to contest [an] agency’s decision to remove [a] foster child from their physical custody” (citation omitted)
• discussing Mitch and Griffin and explaining that the “prospective adoptive parent” exception remains viable following the enactment of Section 6336.1(a)
• affirming trial court’s denial of foster parents’ motion to intervene after court denied agency’s petition to terminate parents’ parental rights
• we apply an abuse of discretion standard of review when reviewing trial court evidentiary rulings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).