PATRICIA LYNN NICHOLS, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
WILLIE FRANK NICHOLS, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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.
The court held that an injunction preventing a custodial parent from having overnight guests is improper without competent, substantial evidence demonstrating it is required to safeguard the child's best interests.
The trial court modified a final judgment of dissolution, enjoining the wife from having an adult male spend the night when the minor child was presen…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Best Interests Of The Child cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This cause is before us on appeal and cross appeal from an order modifying a final judgment of dissolution.
We reverse the trial court’s decision enjoining the wife from having an adult male spend the night in her home when the minor child is in the home, and affirm the other four issues. A review of the entire record reflects that it is completely devoid of any competent and substantial evidence proving the allegations that the mother’s conduct has adversely affected the minor child. See Dinkel v. Dinkel, 322 So. 2d 22 (Fla.1975); Walden v. Walden, 483 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986.)
Additionally, in Miller v. Miller, 423 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), the court addressed an amended final judgment awarding custody of a minor child to the father “as long as [the father] is unmarried and has no sleep-over or live-in friends.” The Fourth District held that “[bjecause restrictions of this nature impact upon the private life of the custodial parent, they will be sustained only if the record contains competent, substantial evidence to demonstrate that they are required to safeguard the best interests of the child.” Id. at 640.
In this case, there is no evidence that the mother’s overnight company has a direct bearing on the welfare of the child. Accordingly, we affirm in part and reverse in part.
BOOTH, C.J., and SMITH and WENT-WORTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Frechter v. Frechter, 548 So. 2d 712 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…ubstantial evidence to demonstrate that they are required to safeguard the best interests of the child.” Miller v. Miller, 423 So. 2d 638, 639-40 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); see also Martin v. Martin, 507 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Nichols v. Nichols, 491 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Summarizing, we reverse and remand for a new hearing wherein the trial judge should set forth his findings in accordance with Rowe, revise the duration of the rehabilitative alimony awarded, classify the town house mortgage pay…
-
Commander v. Commander, 493 So. 2d 530 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…ation has not been permitted. In any event, we do not believe a court must wait until there is a demonstrable adverse affect upon a child, as one might conclude from a cursory reading of Hackley, supra, Walden, supra, and Nich [*533] ols v. Nichols, 491 So. 2d 617 (Fla.1st DCA 1986). Rather, we believe that a reasonably anticipated adverse effect on the child from exposure to a proposed situation or circumstance may be sufficient to support an order prohibiting such situation or circumstance. Beaman v. Beaman…
-
Mummaw v. Mummaw, 532 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…lhofer v. Dahlhofer, 495 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). . See Martin v. Martin, 507 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1987); Miller v. Miller, 423 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Danoff v. Danoff, 501 So. 2d 1361 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Nichols v. Nichols, 491 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Howard v. Howard, 467 So. 2d 768 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); and [*739] Greer v. Greer, 438 So. 2d 535 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1983).…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Dinkel v. Dinkel, 322 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 1975)
- Ward v. State, 423 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- Miller v. Miller, 423 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- Walden v. Walden, 483 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)