Case ID: so3d_148/html/0849-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

C.S.C-D., Mother and M.C., Father, etc., Appellants, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.
    Nos. 5D14-1985, 5D14-2402.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    Oct. 20, 2014.
    Philip A. Haas, of Haas Law, P.S., Seattle and Lori D. Loftis and Jeffrey D. Deen, of Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, for Appellant.
    Ward L. Metzger, of Children’s Legal Services, Jacksonville and Wendie M. Cooper, of Guardian ad Litem Program, Sanford, for Appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See A.M. v. Dep’t of Children & Families, 118 So.3d 998, 999 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (“[I]f statutory deficiencies existed in the trial court’s order, Appellant needed to preserve these issues ‘by a motion for rehearing or ... [by otherwise bringing] the claimed deficiency to the attention of the trial court at a point when it could have been corrected.’ ” (quoting D.T. v. Fla. Dep’t of Children & Families, 54 So.3d 632, 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011))); R.B. v. Dep’t Children & Families, 997 So.2d 1216, 1218 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (citing Mathieu v. Mathieu, 877 So.2d 740, 741 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)).

PALMER, ORFINGER and LAWSON, JJ., concur.