Case ID: so3d_181/html/0574-02.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

A.C., Appellant, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, R.A., minor child, and Adoptive Parents of R.A., Appellees.
    No. 4D15-4380.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    Jan. 6, 2016.
    
      Ronald L. Bornstein of Ronald L. Born-stein, P.A,, Greenacres, for appellant.
    Meredith K. Hall, Bradenton, for appel-lee Florida Department of Children and Families.
    Philip M. Burlington of Burlington & Rockenbach, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee Adoptive Parents of R.A
   PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of two trial court orders, one denying her emergency motion to stay the adoption of A.R., the other denying her motion to vacate the order terminating her parental rights as to A.R. We affirm the order denying the motion to stay the adoption, without further comment. We reverse the order denying the motion to vacate the order of terminationof parental rights “based on lack of standing.” See Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.270; see also Schleger v. Stebelsky, 957 So.2d 71 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (“motion for relief from judgment should not be summarily denied without an evidentiary hearing unless its allegations and accompanying affidavits fail to allege ‘colorable entitlement’ to relief’) (quoting Smith v. Smith, 903 So.2d 1044, 1045 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)). We express no opinion as to whether any color-able entitlement to relief under rule 8.270 is shown.

Reversed and remanded.

DAMOORGIAN, CONNER and FORST, JJ., concur.