Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): cross-motions for evaluations, the trial court entered the order requiring Cranney and Coronado to meet with the parental coordinator. II. Analysis A. Certiorari Review A certiorari petition must pass a three-prong test before an appellate court can grant relief from an erroneous interlocutory order. “A petitioner must establish (1) a departure from the essen- ■ tial requirements of the law, (2) resulting in material injury for the remainder of the trial (3) that cannot be corrected on postjudgment appeal.” Barker v. Barker, 909 So.2d 333, 336 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (quoting Parkway Bank v. Fort Myers Armature Works, Inc., 658 So.2d 646, 648 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)). The appellate court- must conduct a jurisdictional analysis under the last two prongs before determining the merits of the pet 6) (<HOLDING>). In Lonon v. Ferrell, 739 So.2d 650, 652 (Fla. 
 Holding statements: (A) holding facially unconstitutional provision in 1993 version of section 75201 which provided for visitation where child was living with both natural parents (B) holding the foster parents responsible for support where the childs natural parents are unknown and noting that an earlier new york case held that an agreement to adopt did not terminate the natural parents duty of support but that in that earlier case the natural parent was alive and capable of providing for the child (C) holding section 61132b2c facially unconstitutional (D) holding visitation statute unconstitutional because it disregards presumption favoring parental decisionmaking forcing parents to prove visitation not in childs best interest (E) holding that without personal jurisdiction over one parent a court could still decide custody of a child living in the state but could not determine support and visitation
Output (English): holding the foster parents responsible for support where the childs natural parents are unknown and noting that an earlier new york case held that an agreement to adopt did not terminate the natural parents duty of support but that in that earlier case the natural parent was alive and capable of providing for the child