and grandparents in implementing any plan or schedule so that the children can have consistent contact with the grandparents.” The order further provides that “[e]ach party should direct any disagreements regarding the children to the parenting coordinator.” The other order at issue requires Cranney “to consult with” the parenting coordinator “pursuant to the terms of’ the order appointing the coordinator. Various statutory provisions provide grandparents with visitation rights where granting such visitation would be in the child’s best interest. See §§ 39.509 (relating to circumstances where the grandchild “has been adjudicated a dependent child and taken from the physical custody of the parent”); 61.13(2)(b)(2)(c) (relating to the award of custody and determinati 043 (Fla.2000) (<HOLDING>); Saul v. Brunetti, 753 So.2d 26, 29 (Fla.2000)
holding section 61137 unconstitutional on its face holding section 61132b2c facially unconstitutional holding employers admitted policy discriminatory on its face holding that section 92434 could be unconstitutional in application holding that a complaint must contain enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face