D.H. v. Adept Community Services, Inc.
The Florida Supreme Court held that the term "guardian ad litem" in the minority tolling statute, section 95.051(1)(h) (now (1)(i)), Florida Statutes, means a guardian ad litem appointed to represent the child in the particular proceeding in which the claim to be tolled is brought — not a GAL appointed in a separate dependency case. Because the twins had no non-adverse parent, no statutory guardian (a dependency temporary-custody order does not create a guardianship), and no GAL in the negligence action, the limitations period was tolled until permanent guardians were appointed, making the complaint timely. The Court quashed the Second District's affirmance of summary judgment.
Key facts
- Twins with no non-adverse parent sued a community services provider for negligence; a dependency court placed them in temporary custody of relatives but appointed no guardian ad litem in the negligence action.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendant on limitations grounds, finding tolling inapplicable because a guardian ad litem had been appointed in a separate dependency case.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This is a significant clarification of Florida's minority tolling statute that plaintiffs' lawyers handling child-abuse, dependency-related, and other minors' tort claims will cite routinely: the existence of a… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.