STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. JIMMIE, A MINOR, JAMES I. TILDEN, APPELLANT,
v.
DIANE LOCK UTREVA, A/K/A DIANE FANNING FERNANDEZ, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Change In Circumstances cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
In Tilden v. Locke, 383 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), we reversed a December 7,1979 order of the trial court which required the appellant-father to return the parties’ child to the appellee-mother after a short “visitation” which was to end on December 9. This appeal challenges a December 11, 1979 final order which granted permanent custody to the mother.1 For the reasons stated in and on the authority of Tilden v. Locke, supra, the order under review is likewise .reversed and the cause remanded with directions to enter judgment summarily enforcing the New York State Supreme Court award of custody to the father. Reversed and remanded.
. Contrary to the trial court’s statement at the earlier hearing that it would not be inclined to change permanent custody without a showing of a change of circumstances, no such evidence was presented prior to the entry of the December 11 order now before us. It is evident that it was entered because the father, in direct violation of the December 9 order, which was neither stayed nor superseded, did not return the boy to his mother, instead returned to New York with the child and was not present before the court on December 11. While we condemn the appellant’s defiance of the lower court, neither can we approve the use of a child custody award in this fashion as a means of punishing a parent. See Brooks v. Brooks, 20 Or.App. 43, 530 P. 2d 547 (1975).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Landingham v. Landingham, 685 So. 2d 946 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…t DCA 1988), rev. denied, 544 So .2d 199 (Fla.1989) (holding a court cannot change custody without showing that the change is in the best interest of the child); Eddy v. Napier, 558 So. 2d 199, 201 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); State ex rel. Tilden v. Utreva, 386 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (reversing a trial court’s modification of custody based on the father’s failure to return the children to the mother as required by a court order); Doran v. Doran, 212 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 218 So. 2d 174 (Fla.…
-
Echezarreta v. Echezarreta, 944 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…ningfully to “share parental responsibility,” see Burckle v. Burckle, 915 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Decker v. Lyle, 848 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Landingham v. Landingham, 685 So. 2d 946 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); State ex rel. Tilden v. Utreva, 386 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); see also Cecena v. Chambers, 938 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006), or for other assumed wrongdoing, see Rose v. Ford, 861 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Meixner v. Meixner, 785 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Andrews v. Andrews, 624…
Authorities Cited
- Tilden v. Locke, 383 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)