Case Name: In the Interest of K.A.B., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, Appellant, v. Maureen HYSON, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1986-03-06
Citations: 483 So. 2d 898
Docket Number: No. 85-712
Parties: In the Interest of K.A.B., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, Appellant, v. Maureen HYSON, Appellee.
Judges: ORFINGER, J., concurs.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 483
Pages: 898–900

Head Matter:
In the Interest of K.A.B., a Child. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, Appellant, v. Maureen HYSON, Appellee.
No. 85-712.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
March 6, 1986.
Douglas E. Whitney, Dist. Counsel, Dept, of Health & Rehabilitative Services and Gerry L. Clark, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Orlando, for appellant.
No appearance for appellee.

Opinion:
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal from an adjudication of dependency and placement of custody in the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services. As legal custodian, the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Ser vices may appeal the order. Fla.Stat. § 39.14(1),
The order directs the custodian to keep the child at "Country Acres." The custodian of the child has appealed on the ground that the court has not been granted the authority to direct precisely where the child is cared for, but only to place the child in its custody. We agree with appellant. Section 39.41(l)(d) provides that a court which adjudicates a child to be dependent may place the child with the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services. Section 39.41(3), Florida Statutes (1984 Supp.) states the following:
An agency granted legal custody shall have the right to determine where and with whom the child shall live, but an individual granted legal custody shall exercise all rights and duties personally unless otherwise ordered by the court.
Thus, it is crystal clear that it is within the discretion of the agency to decide where to keep a child who is in its custody. The agency is, of course, better equipped to make day-to-day health and welfare decisions which concern the child. T.W. v. State, 338 So.2d 549 (Fla.2d DCA 1976); F.B. v. State, 319 So.2d 77 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); In the Interest of J.N., 279 So.2d 50 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973). The courts are not given general supervisory power over the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services under the statutes. Fla. Depart. of Health and Rehab. Serv., 327 So.2d 115 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Department of Health and Rehab. Serv. v. Owens, 305 So.2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974).
It is up to the courts, both trial and appellate, to adjudicate legal rights and responsibilities, it is not within their province to manage the affairs of another branch of government.
The order of adjudication and commitment is affirmed; the words "at Country Acres" are hereby deleted.
It is so ordered.
ORFINGER, J., concurs.
COWART, J., dissents with opinion.