neglect, or abandonment. It appears from the record that at the time of the termination hearing, the case plan, in- eluding the addendum, as to E.C. had not been technically “filed with the court.” However, it appears that this technical omission was inadvertent. The case plan was reviewed and approved by the court after E.C. was born, the addendum to the case plan made reference to the Mother’s visit to and departure from the hospital during the Mother’s twenty-eighth week of pregnancy, and the case plan was continually reviewed by the court throughout the year and a half prior to the filing of the petition for termination and throughout the next year and a half prior to the termination hearings. Cf. Y.F. v. Dep’t of Children & Family Servs., 893 So.2d 641, 642 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (<HOLDING>). Several judicial review hearings were held in
holding that the conversion of a chapter 7 petition to a chapter 13 petition was not final until the plan itself was approved holding in a termination of parental rights case that as a question of law the trial courts ruling that the facts of this case sufficiently support the termination ground of willful abandonment are reviewed de novo with no presumption of correctness holding that trial court erred in granting petition for termination of parental rights based on noncompliance with case plan when case plan was not filed and approved by the court until seven months after petition for termination was filed holding in termination of parental rights case that trial court erred in taking judicial notice of evidence before him in guardianship hearing in same case holding that petitioner was dili gent for equitable tolling purposes where petitioner filed state petition two months after conviction was final and filed federal petition seven days after discovering state had denied petition on the merits