GLORIA ALARCON, APPELLANT,
v.
ANDRES ALARCON, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1979-05-11
No. 78-2384
Before PEARSON and SCHWARTZ, JJ., and CHAPPELL, BILL G., Associate Judge.
370 So. 2d 105 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1979) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that custody orders were improperly granted without proper notice to the mother and are therefore reversed.


Facts & Procedural History

The father was awarded temporary and permanent custody of a minor child without proper notice to the mother. The mother appealed these orders.…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The order of February 2, 1978 awarding temporary custody of the minor child to the father-appellee, and the order of November 15, 1978 awarding him permanent custody are reversed because proper notice of neither hearing was given to the mother-appellant. Sections 61.131, 61.1312, Florida Statutes (1977). The cause is remanded for a full hearing, upon proper notice, of the father’s motion for modification of the final judgment of October 25, 1977 which awarded custody to the mother. That final judgment is thus restored to its full force and effect.

By stipulation of the parties before us in open court, the physical custody of the child shall remain with the father pending the hearing. We specifically order, however, that this temporary physical custody shall not affect the burden placed upon the father to demonstrate affirmatively, in accordance with the applicable law, his right to a modification of the custody provisions of the final judgment. E. g., Frye v. Frye, 205 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967); Ritsi v. Ritsi, 160 So. 2d 159 (Fla.3d DCA 1964), cert. denied, 166 So. 2d 591 (Fla.1964).

Because of the circumstances involved in this case, we have advanced the cause for oral argument. For the same reasons, we direct that the hearing ordered by this opinion shall be conducted as speedily as reasonably possible.

Petition for rehearing is dispensed with, and the mandate shall issue forthwith.

It is so ordered.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Geisler v. Geisler, 397 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)
    …custody proceeding....” After studying the record and brief of appellant,1 we hold that the order below directing delivery of custody to appellee was a decree and that reasonable notice to appellant was required before entry. See Alarcon v. Alarcon, 370 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). We reverse the order below and remand for a full hearing with proper notice to appellant. Until that hearing is held, we direct that the parties be returned to their prior position so that appellant has physical custody of the m…
  • Crooks v. Crooks, 657 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
    …Procedure, it cannot be entered without sworn evidence. Swartsell v. Swartsell, 615 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Leinenbach v. Leinenbach, 634 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Forte v. Torres, 409 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Alarcon v. Alarcon, 370 So. 2d 105 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). It is now several months since entry of the ex parte order and this court has no information as to what, if anything, has occurred in the interim. Appellant had the opportunity to seek further relief in the trial court and appa…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw