Martindale-Hubbell
The National Advocates
The National Advocates
National Board of Trial Advocacy
The Florida Bar
Best Lawyers
Client Distinction Award
The National Advocates

Published on: | by

It is not uncommon for parents who share custody of a child to disagree over where the child should live or whether one parent should be able to move to another state with the child. In such instances, the parties will typically seek input from the courts to determine their parental rights. If a party relocates with a child without the court’s permission, they will likely face adverse consequences, as demonstrated in a recent Florida case. If you need help with a custody dispute, it is smart to consult a Miami child custody attorney to discuss your rights.

Case Background

It is alleged that the mother and the father were in a long-term relationship but never married. They resided together in Hawaii, where their daughter was born. However, in 2017, the mother relocated with their daughter to Key West without objection from the father. After settling in Key West, the parties agreed to a rotating custody arrangement for their daughter. In 2021, the father also moved to Key West and filed a petition to establish paternity, seeking timesharing and child support. The mother responded with a counterpetition, seeking similar remedies.

Reportedly, the court ratified a temporary order granting timesharing rights on an alternating weekly basis. Within two months, however, the father filed a petition to relocate with their daughter back to Hawaii. The mother objected, and the court scheduled the remaining issues in the case for trial, including the relocation petition. The father then relocated back to Hawaii before the court rendered a ruling on the relocation petition. The trial court then denied the petition for relocation while simultaneously adopting the father’s proposed parenting plan, granting him extended timesharing with their daughter during school recesses in Hawaii and additional timesharing in Key West. These conflicting decisions prompted the subsequent appeal. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Florida custody disputes can become contentious, and it is not uncommon for one parent to accuse the other of trying to alienate them from their child. In some instances, a parent may go so far as to accuse a co-parent of tortious interference with custodial rights. While Florida law allows for such actions, they can be challenging to prove, as demonstrated in a recent Florida custody case. If you are dealing with a custody disagreement, it is advisable to meet with a Miami child custody attorney promptly to determine your options.

History of the Case

It is reported that the father brought tort claims against the mother and the stepfather. Specifically, he alleged intentional interference with custodial rights as well as intentional infliction of emotional distress claims (IIED) against both the mother and the stepfather regarding their then-teenage daughter. The focus of the allegations against the stepfather involved his purported conspiracy with the mother in preventing the daughter’s return to Canada, where the father resided, against the daughter’s wishes to remain in Florida.

It is alleged that the stepfather’s involvement encompassed actions such as allowing the daughter to reside in his home, facilitating her enrollment in a Florida high school, and supporting her pursuit of emancipation from the father. The mother and stepfather moved for dismissal of the father’s claims via summary judgment. The trial court granted the motion, prompting the father to appeal. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

When faced with custody disputes, the Florida courts will typically take great care in drafting a parenting plan that is in the best interest of the children involved. As such, a party that wishes to modify a parenting plan must show that a change has occurred since the plan was issued that is both lasting and substantial, must set forth their requested relief, and must show that the change warrants the relief sought. As discussed in a recent Florida ruling, if a court grants relief that is not requested, the court’s ruling may be reversed. If you need help with a disagreement over custody, it is smart to talk to a Miami child custody attorney about what steps you can take to protect your rights.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the mother and the father were not married but shared a minor child who was born in 2010. In 2012, the trial court established a parenting plan that dictated shared parental responsibility and a 70/30 timesharing schedule, primarily in favor of the mother. The plan required phone contact between the child and the noncustodial parent on specified days. In 2019, the father was arrested for healthcare fraud, prompting an emergency order awarding the mother sole custody.

Allegedly, the father was convicted in 2020. While serving a federal prison sentence, he filed a petition to enforce the phone call schedule and filed a supplemental petition focusing on child support. Following a hearing, the trial court expanded the father’s visitation rights, ordering four prison visits a year and a modified phone call schedule. The mother appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Divorce actions are often contentious, and it is not uncommon for a Florida court to issue an order in a divorce proceeding that prevents a party from taking intentional or inadvertent actions that harm the other party’s interests. If a person fails to comply with the terms of such order, they may be held in contempt of court. As discussed in a recent Florida divorce case, overturning a contempt finding can be challenging. If you want to obtain a divorce, it is wise to confer with a Miami divorce lawyer to evaluate your options.

Procedural and Factual Setting

It is reported that the husband and the wife were involved in an ongoing divorce case. The wife filed two contempt motions against the husband; one of these motions was granted by the trial court. The contempt order the court granted arose from the husband allegedly canceling a credit card that the wife had access to due to her employment with their jointly-owned business. The husband then sought certiorari relief, arguing that the trial court couldn’t consider the credit card issue as it belonged to the business, a non-party to the case.

Certiorari Relief in Divorce Actions

On appeal, the court first explained the principles surrounding certiorari jurisdiction, emphasizing its extraordinary nature and limited application. Specifically, the court noted that certiorari is considered only when there is a departure from the essential requirements of the law and when irreparable harm, not correctable on post-judgment appeal, is demonstrated. The court underscored the importance of a “jurisdictional evaluation” focused on irreparable harm before certiorari can be used for reviewing non-final orders, aiming to discourage piecemeal review. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

Many people involved in divorce proceedings in Florida cannot resolve their disputed issues without a trial. Once the trial is held and the court makes its determinations, it will issue a final order of dissolution. Parties can appeal such orders, but they must follow the procedural rules and guidelines. Otherwise, their appeals may be rejected. This was demonstrated in a recent Florida opinion in which the court denied an appeal of a final judgment of divorce due to the husband’s failure to file a copy of the trial court’s transcript. If you want to obtain a divorce, it is wise to confer with a Miami divorce lawyer to evaluate your options.

History of the Case

It is reported that the wife initiated divorce proceedings in October 2018. A trial was held in November 2022, during which the court addressed issues raised in the divorce petition. Following the trial, the trial court issued a final judgment of dissolution. The husband did not file a motion for rehearing following the final judgment. He then appealed the final judgment of dissolution.

Appealing Final Judgments of Dissolution

The husband raised various errors on appeal, primarily challenging the trial court’s factual findings. However, the court emphasized that when errors appear on the face of a final order for the first time, the party must bring attention to the error through a motion for rehearing or a similar motion to preserve it for appeal. Continue reading ›

by
Posted in: Divorce
Published on:
Updated:

Published on: | by

When a married couple with minor children decides to divorce, they will typically have to determine their parental rights. Making custody determinations can be a lengthy process for Florida courts, and in most instances, they will issue temporary custody orders prior to delivering final orders. As explained in a recent Florida opinion, the courts have ample leeway when making temporary custody orders, and it is rare for them to be overturned. If you need help with a custody dispute, it is in your best interest to talk to a Miami child custody lawyer at your earliest convenience.

Factual History and Procedural Setting

it is reported that following a three-day evidentiary hearing, the trial court issued a temporary order that mandated that her eldest child was to continue attending military school. The order also specified that the father would maintain 100% timesharing of the three minor children, with the mother having no contact with them until the final trial.  The mother appealed.

Temporary Child Custody Determinations

On appeal, the mother argued that the trial court violated her right to due process and abused its discretion when making the temporary custody determinations. The court rejected this argument and affirmed the trial court ruling. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Florida, marital assets are subject to divorce actions, while non-marital assets remain the property of the spouse that owns it. Assets that become comingled, where marital and non-marital funds intermingle, can present challenges during equitable distribution. The court may need to discern the separate contributions of each spouse to determine the appropriate distribution. This was illustrated in a recent Florida divorce action, in which the husband argued that the home he bought before getting married was not a marital asset. The court ultimately disagreed that the wife had no claim to the value of the home, noting that she contributed to its improvement and maintenance throughout the marriage. If you have questions about how the decision to end your marriage could impact you financially, it is wise to speak with a Miami divorce lawyer at your earliest convenience.

Factual and Procedural Background of the Case

It is reported that the husband and wife were divorced after more than twenty years of marriage. The husband subsequently challenged the trial court’s amended final judgment of the dissolution of the marriage. On appeal, the husband disputed the trial court’s decision to award the wife permanent alimony, which the husband deemed excessive. Further, he argued that the family home should not have been classified as a marital asset for equitable distribution, as he bought it prior to the marriage. Finally, he asserted that the wife was entitled to more than a 50/50 split of the proceeds from the husband’s Corvette trade-in.

Equitable Distribution in Florida Divorce Actions

On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court’s alimony award without detailed discussion. In doing so, the court noted the husband’s failure to identify a clear error on the record. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In family law cases, the courts will order one party to pay the other’s legal fees in certain situations. In doing so, if the court finds that the party from whom fees are sought engaged in litigation conduct that is deemed egregious, vexatious, or meritless, the court may impose fees on that party to deter them from engaging in such behavior. Known as Rosen fees, they are typically reserved for cases involving the most egregious litigation behavior. The award of Rosen fees is at the discretion of the court, and the court will carefully evaluate the specific circumstances of each case before making such an award. It is important to note, however, that the Rosen case does not provide grounds for awarding such fees but sets forth the criteria for adjusting an award, as explained in a recent Florida ruling. If you are involved in a family law argument, it is smart to talk to a Miami family law lawyer about what steps you can take to protect your interests.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the mother and father engaged in a contentious paternity dispute. After the parties came to an agreement on paternity, the mother sought to establish a parenting plan and define parental responsibility and child support. The initial trial, conducted by the retiring judge, resulted in proposed findings that favored equal timesharing rights and shared parental responsibility, with details on exchanges and holidays. The parties couldn’t agree on a judgment, and the succeeding judge refused to enter one. A second trial was conducted, concluding with a final judgment granting the father majority timesharing and sole parental responsibility, which is the subject of a separate appeal.

It is reported that the father subsequently moved for fees under Rosen, alleging the mother’s conduct was hypocritical, lacked merit, and was against the child’s best interests. The court granted the request, citing the mother’s non-compliance with a speech therapy schedule and unsubstantiated concerns for the child’s safety. The court ordered the mother to pay $25,000 in fees, and she appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Florida, the courts may deem it necessary to terminate parental rights under specific circumstances outlined in the Florida Statutes. Termination of parental rights is a serious legal action and is considered when it is determined to be in the best interest of the child due to factors that jeopardize the child’s well-being and safety. While generally, the Divison of Children and Families brings actions to terminate parental rights, parents can file termination actions as well, as discussed in a recent Florida opinion. If you need help with a dispute over child custody, it is advisable to confer with a Miami child custody attorney promptly.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the child was born in 2011 to the mother and Father, Venezuelan citizens whose relationship ended before her birth. A Venezuelan court approved a custody arrangement, but in July 2012, the mother brought the child to Miami, prompting the Father to file a Hague Convention petition for the child’s return to Venezuela. The court granted the Father’s petition, and the child returned to Venezuela.

Reportedly,  after the Father’s relocation to the U.S., a second Hague Convention case was initiated by the mother, but the court denied her petition. In 2013, the Father filed a petition for termination of the mother’s parental rights. The court issued a final judgment terminating the mother’s parental rights based on statutory grounds, including abandonment, conduct threatening the child’s well-being, egregious conduct, and conspiracy or solicitation to murder the other parent. The mother timely appealed. Continue reading ›

Published on: | by

In Florida, parents have a legal obligation to provide financial support to their children. Typically, this obligation ends at eighteen. If a parent did not provide financial support for their child while the child was a minor, however, their co-parent may be able to recover retroactive support, even after the child has reached the age of majority. This was illustrated in a recent Florida opinion in which the court explained that the statute does not limit the right to recover retroactive support to parents of minor children. If you have questions about child support, it is smart to meet with a Miami child support attorney as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural Setting of the Case

It is alleged that the mother and father had two children together. The Department of Revenue initiated a case to establish paternity and establish child support for their children. The Administrative Law Judge conducted a video proceeding, where the parties stipulated paternity, and it was acknowledged that both children had resided solely with the mother.

Reportedly, during the hearing, the Judge expressed uncertainty regarding awarding child support to the older child, who had turned eighteen before the service of the Department of Revenue’s petition. The court ultimately concluded that the older child was no longer a ‘child’ and, therefore, the court lacked statutory authorization for retroactive child support. The Department of Revenue appealed. Continue reading ›