Pena v. Rodriguez

Summary

The Third District Court of Appeal of Florida reversed a final judgment of paternity addressing parental responsibility, timesharing, and child support. The court held that the trial court violated the father's procedural due process rights by relying on counsel's proffer and other unsworn representations without receiving admissible evidence or providing a meaningful opportunity to present and challenge evidence. The case was remanded for a new adjudicatory hearing.

Holdings

1. A trial court violates procedural due process when it relies solely on unsworn representations of counsel to adjudicate contested parental responsibility, timesharing, and child-support issues without allowing the opposing party a full, fair, and meaningful opportunity to present, examine, cross-examine, and rebut evidence.
2. The record did not establish a valid settlement or waiver that authorized the trial court to decide the contested issues without an evidentiary hearing, and a procedural due process violation constitutes fundamental error that may be raised for the first time on appeal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court violated Pena's procedural due process rights by entering a final judgment determining parental responsibility, timesharing, and child support based solely on unsworn representations of counsel and without an evidentiary hearing.
2. Whether any alleged informal settlement or waiver justified the trial court's reliance on proffered evidence.
3. Whether the final judgment of paternity should be reversed and the matter remanded for a new adjudicatory hearing.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded