Dept. of Children & Families v. Thomas Alfred Panno
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledMarch 17, 2021
Docket2D20-2073
StatusPublished
๐ฐ News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING
MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND )
FAMILIES, )
)
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Case No. 2D20-2073
)
THOMAS ALFREDO PANNO, )
)
Appellee. )
)
Opinion filed March 17, 2021.
Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.130
from the Circuit Court for DeSoto
County, Don T. Hall, Judge.
Javier A. Enriquez and Andrew J.
McGinley, Assistant General Counsels
of Department of Children and Families,
Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Bruce R. Plesser, Gulf Port, for
Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Mr. Thomas Panno filed a complaint seeking to compel the Department of
Children and Families (DCF) to make available for his inspection certain records. The
trial court entered an order to show cause directing DCF to respond. DCF filed a motion
to dismiss, arguing that because service of the complaint and the order to show cause
was not made in compliance with section 48.111(2), Florida Statutes (2019), the trial
court lacked jurisdiction. The trial court denied the motion. DCF seeks review.
Section 48.111(2) provides, in relevant part, that "[p]rocess against any
public agency . . . not a body corporate or having a governing board or commission
shall be served on the . . . chief executive officer of the agency." This section applies to
civil actions against DCF to make records available for inspection. See Fla. Dep't of
Child. & Fams. v. Sun-Sentinel, Inc., 865 So. 2d 1278, 1285-86 (Fla. 2004) (holding that
trial court erred in denying DCF's motion to dismiss in action to obtain public records
where plaintiff failed to comply with several rules and statutes, including section
48.111(2), concerning service on a public agency); cf. Kelly v. Fla. Dep't of Child. &
Fams., 233 F.R.D. 632, 634 (S.D. Fla. 2005) ("Plaintiff commenced a civil action against
the DCF and pursuant to Fla. Stat. ยง 48.111(2) Plaintiff was required to serve the
Summons and the Complaint on the DCF's chief executive officer."). As DCF was not
served in compliance with section 48.111(2), we reverse and remand with instructions
for the trial court to grant DCF's motion to dismiss. The dismissal shall be without
prejudice to Mr. Panno to refile his complaint and properly serve DCF pursuant to
section 48.111(2).
Reversed; remanded with instructions.
LaROSE, LUCAS, and STARGEL, JJ., Concur.
-2-