In re E.D.H.

Summary

The Court held that the termination order was properly entered even though the judge who presided over the hearing retired before signing it. The record contained an unchallenged statement that the original judge had made the findings and conclusions, and the substitute chief judge's signature and entry of the order were therefore presumed to be administrative and ministerial under Rules 52 and 63. Because the respondent did not rebut that presumption with competent and substantial evidence, the Court affirmed.