Florida Court Blocks Abortion Under Consent Law
The issue has long been controversial, with supporters of the requirements saying minors are not mature enough to make abortion decisions.
August 16, 2022 at 01:39 PM
4 minute read
Litigation
An appeals court Monday upheld a decision by a Northwest Florida circuit judge to block a teen from having an abortion without notification and consent of a parent or guardian.
The teen, described by one appellate judge as almost 17 years old and "parentless," sought court approval to bypass notification and consent requirements in state law.
Escambia County Circuit Judge Jessica Frydrychowicz denied the bypass request, and a three-judge panel of the First District Court of Appeal upheld that decision.
"The trial court found, based on the non-adversarial presentation below, that appellant (the teen) had not established by clear and convincing evidence that she was sufficiently mature to decide whether to terminate her pregnancy," said the ruling, fully shared by Judges Harvey Jay and Rachel Nordby and partially joined by Judge Scott Makar. "Having reviewed the record, we affirm the trial court's decision under the deferential standard of appellate review set out (in the consent law)."
Makar dissented from part of the decision, writing that the appeals court should send the case back to the circuit judge for the possibility of further consideration.
"The trial judge denied the petition but explicitly left open the availability of further proceedings by saying that the 'court finds (the minor) may be able, at a later date, to adequately articulate her request, and the court may re-evaluate its decision at that time,'" Makar wrote. "The emphasized language indicates the trial judge must have been contemplating that the minor — who was 10 weeks pregnant at the time — would potentially be returning before long — given the statutory time constraints at play — to shore up any lingering doubt the trial court harbored."
But Jay and Nordby concluded that sending the case back to the circuit judge was not warranted.
"The trial court's order and findings are neither unclear nor lacking such that a remand would be necessary for us to perform our review under the statute," they wrote in the main decision.
The main decision did not provide many details of the case, but Makar wrote that the teen, identified only as Jane Doe 22-B, is "parentless," lives with a relative and has an appointed guardian.
"She is pursuing a GED with involvement in a program designed to assist young women who have experienced trauma in their lives by providing educational support and counseling," Makar wrote. "The minor experienced renewed trauma (the death of a friend) shortly before she decided to seek termination of her pregnancy."
The teen said in a court petition that she was "sufficiently mature" to make a decision about an abortion, was not ready to have a baby, did not have a job and that the father was unable to assist her, Makar wrote.
But Makar wrote that the teen "inexplicably" did not ask for representation by an attorney, which would have been free. During a hearing before the circuit judge, she was accompanied by a case worker and a guardian ad-litem child advocate manager, he wrote.
"The trial judge displayed concern for the minor's predicament throughout the hearing; she asked difficult questions of the minor on sensitive personal matters in a compassionate manner," Makar wrote. "The trial judge's tone and method of questioning were commendable and her ability to produce a thoughtful written order in a rapid fashion is admirable (she prepared her written order immediately after the hearing, handing a copy thereafter to the minor). Based on the high standard of appellate review, I concur in affirmance of the factual findings of the trial court as well as her decision to deny the petition without prejudicing the minor from seeking relief from the trial court in coming days."
Florida voters in 2004 approved a constitutional amendment that cleared the way for the Legislature to pass a law requiring that parents or guardians be notified before minors have abortions. Lawmakers in 2020 added to that with the consent requirement.
The issue has long been controversial, with supporters of the requirements saying minors are not mature enough to make abortion decisions. But opponents have argued, in part, that some minors could face issues such as abuse if their parents found out they were pregnant.
Lawmakers included a process for minors to go to court and bypass the notice and consent requirements. Such cases reaching appellate courts, however, are relatively rare.
A panel of the First District Court of Appeal in January upheld a Leon County circuit judge's ruling that a minor should be required to get parental consent before having an abortion.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFlorida Supreme Court Clarifies Qualifications for Court-Appointed Arbitrators
3 minute read$5.5M Miami Verdict: Meet the Lawyers Behind the Slip-and-Fall Suit
US Bankruptcy Filings Rise 16.2% as Interest Rates, Inflation, and End of COVID Relief Hit Hard
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250