C.Z. — Second District affirmed the child-welfare judgment without a written explanation

Case
In the Interest of D.A. and L.Z., children; C.Z. v. Department of Children and Families and Guardian ad Litem Program
Court
Florida Second District Court of Appeal
Judge
Morris; Rothstein-Youakim; Atkinson
Date Decided
August 19, 2026
Docket No.
2D2026-0351
Topics
Child Welfare; Appeals; Per Curiam Affirmance
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

C.Z. appealed a judgment of the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County involving the children D.A. and L.Z. The Department of Children and Families and the Guardian ad Litem Program appeared as appellees.

The appellate opinion does not describe the underlying facts, the nature of the circuit court’s judgment, the arguments raised on appeal, or the applicable legal standards.

The Court’s Holding

The Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court’s judgment.

The court issued a per curiam affirmance without a written explanation. Accordingly, the opinion states no legal rationale and resolves no identified issue through a written holding beyond leaving the judgment intact.

Key Takeaways

  • The Second District affirmed the Hillsborough County circuit court’s judgment.
  • The decision was unanimous, with Judges Morris, Rothstein-Youakim, and Atkinson concurring.
  • Because the opinion contains no reasoning or factual discussion, it provides no written guidance on the substantive child-welfare issues presented.

Why It Matters

The decision ends this appeal by preserving the circuit court’s judgment. Its broader significance is limited because the court did not explain its reasoning or announce a rule of law.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top