Case Name: T.H., Mother of K.H., Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1999-06-30
Citations: 736 So. 2d 126
Docket Number: No. 98-4082
Parties: T.H., Mother of K.H., Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.
Judges: MINER and LAWRENCE, 33., CONCUR.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 736
Pages: 126–128

Head Matter:
T.H., Mother of K.H., Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, Appellee.
No. 98-4082.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
June 30, 1999.
Michelle A. Inere, Pensacola, Attorney for Appellant.
Alice H. Murray, Shalimar, Charles A. Wade, Crestview, and Thomas F. McGuire, Pensacola, for Appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
In this child dependency case, T.H. (the natural mother) appeals from an order determining custody of her minor child, K.H. In the order'appealed from, the trial court, upon consideration of appellant's motion for reunification with the minor child, determined the issue of K.H.'s permanent custody. However, the trial judge also reserved jurisdiction to determine integrally-related issues of child support and visitation, providing:
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. The minor child, [K.H.], shall be placed with the Father who will be designated as the residential custodial parent. Given the age of the child, the Court finds that frequent contact with the Mother would be beneficial for the child and therefore, refers the issue of visitation to mediation. In the event an agreement cannot be reached, the parties shall schedule a hearing before this Court to determine the issue of visitation. The current visitation shall remain in effect until further Order of this Court.
2. The court reserves jurisdiction to enter further orders regarding support or other issues involving the minor child.
(Emphasis supplied).
Therefore, the order, on its face, reflects that the trial court, while resolving the issue of custody, has reserved jurisdiction to determine the issue of visitation, pending implementation of an alternative dispute resolution mechanism which will require additional action by the court. Further, the order provides that, in the event an agreement regarding visitation is not reached, the parties are ordered to schedule a hearing before the court, so that the court can determine the issue itself. Lastly, the court has specifically reserved jurisdiction to determine the issue of child support.
Here, then, the order appealed from is "merely a preliminary order in a proceeding that will eventually culminate in a subsequent final order." PHILIP J. PA-DOVANO, FLORIDA APPELLATE PRACTICE § 22.15, at 429 (2d ed.1997). After the lower tribunal enters such subsequent order, appellant will have an opportunity to appeal from the trial court's disposition of all related issues.
For that reason, this appeal is sua sponte DISMISSED. See generally Maryland Casualty Co. v. Century Constr. Corp., 656 So.2d 611 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Benton v. Moore, 655 So.2d 1272, 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). Such dismissal is without prejudice to appellant's right to file a timely notice of appeal after a final order has been rendered in the case below.
MINER and LAWRENCE, 33., CONCUR.
WEBSTER, J., DISSENTS WITH OPINION.
. At the time appellant's motion was filed, the minor child was living with the child's natural father.
. The issue of visitation appears to be ripe for adjudication, based upon the trial court's finding contained in the decretal part of the order that "frequent contact with [appellant] would be beneficial for the child."
. The rules regarding dependency mediation require any mediation agreement to be submitted by the mediator to the court. See Fla. R.App. P. 8.290(o)(l)(Report on Mediation), Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure ("[i]f agreement is reached . such agreement shall be immediately reduced to writing, signed by the attending parties, and promptly submitted to the court by the mediator"). The Rules of Juvenile Procedure provide further that, "[u]pon receipt of a full or partial mediation agreement, the court shall hold a hearing and enter an order accepting or rejecting the agreement consistent with the best interest of the child." See Fla. R.App. P. 8.290(p)(Court Hearing and Order Upon Mediated Agreement).
If no agreement is reached in mediation, the mediator is also required to submit a report to the court, which becomes a part of the court file. See Rule 8.290(o)(2), Florida Rules of Juvenile Procedure ("[i]f the parties do not reach an agreement as to any matter as a result of mediation, the mediator shall report the lack of an agreement to the court without comment or recommendation"). In that event, the trial court, in the present case, has ordered the parties to schedule a hearing before the Court to determine the issue of visitation.
. We reject any contention that the issue of visitation is not pending below because the record reflects no unresolved motion related to that issue. Appellant, in the notice of appeal, has characterized the order appealed from as an "final Order denying [appellant's] Motion for Reunification in a dependency action." In that motion (entitled a "Petition/ Request to Change Primary Parental Responsibility/Custody"), appellant stated that she "want[ed] custody changed from [the natural father] back to [appellant] with father only having visitation. Not being able to leave town with child without consent of mother." (Appellant's petition to change custody at p. 2)(Emphasis supplied).
In considering the visitation issue which was raised by appellant's petition, the trial court — on the face of the order appealed from — has preliminarily addressed the issue (by finding "that frequent contact with the Mother would be beneficial for the child") but left it unresolved, pending further judicial activity. An order which thus leaves open a question for judicial determination is not a final order. Cf. Carlton v. Wal-Mart Stores, 621 So.2d 451 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)(order reciting that cause was dismissed without prejudice met finality test: "whether the case is disposed of by the order and whether a question remains open for judicial determination[;][i]n other words, a final decree marks the end of judicial labor") (Citations omitted).