Background
The Department of Children and Families petitioned to terminate L.C.’s parental rights to her minor child, A.I. Mother failed to appear at the April 17, 2026 adjudicatory hearing after being ordered to attend, resulting in a consent default under Florida law.
The circuit court entered a final judgment terminating Mother’s parental rights on April 22, 2026. Mother moved to vacate the consent default, but the court denied that request. She appealed both the denial and the termination judgment.
The Court’s Holding
The Third District affirmed the denial of Mother’s motion to vacate the consent default and affirmed the termination judgment. The opinion did not find reversible error in the default or the resulting termination.
The court agreed, however, that the judgment’s introduction contained inaccurate statements: it said DCF was not seeking to terminate Mother’s rights and that the court had heard evidence on the petition’s alleged grounds. DCF did seek termination, and no such evidence was heard because Mother’s failure to appear constituted consent. Those errors were clerical and had no substantive effect on the decision.
The court remanded solely to correct the scrivener’s errors in the judgment.
Key Takeaways
- A parent’s failure to appear at a properly noticed TPR adjudicatory hearing can constitute consent to termination.
- The appellate court upheld the denial of relief from the consent default and the termination judgment.
- Inaccurate boilerplate in a termination judgment may be corrected on remand without requiring reversal when it did not affect the judgment’s substance.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces the consequences of nonappearance at a TPR adjudicatory hearing after a parent has been ordered to attend. A consent default can support termination without DCF presenting evidence on the petition’s statutory grounds.
It also distinguishes substantive defects from correctable clerical mistakes. Even in parental-rights cases, inaccurate language in a final judgment does not require reversal where the error had no effect on the trial court’s analysis or result.