ELIZABETH SCHNICKE, APPELLANT,
v.
LOREN LEWIS SCHNICKE, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Modification Of Court Orders cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, Judge.
The order appealed from is reversed insofar as it transfers the primary residential care of the minor child of the parties from appellant to appellee. This order followed a noticed hearing on appellee’s motion to hold appellant in contempt for allegedly disobeying the court’s order on visitation. No pleadings were filed requesting a change of custody nor was there any notice that any such change of custody would be heard or considered by the court. The trial court cannot modify a support order or other adjudicated right unless the court’s subject matter jurisdiction has been properly invoked by appropriate pleadings, and that invoked jurisdiction has been perfected by the proper service of process and due process notice and an opportunity to be heard on that issue has been had. Department of H.R.S. v. Wesley, 497 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). See Cortina v. Corti-na, 98 So. 2d 334 (Fla.1957) (a decree cannot be modified unless the issue of modification is presented in appropriate proceedings and the parties are given opportunity to be heard).
REVERSED.
DAUKSCH and DANIEL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Laloggia-Vonhegel v. Vonhegel, 732 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…to award temporary custody of the children to Mr. VonHe-gel, the trial court’s jurisdiction to hear these issues was not invoked or perfected and could not serve as a basis for the trial court’s order transferring custody. See Schnicke v. Schnicke, 533 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Brady v. Jones, 491 So. 2d 1272, 1273 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Further, on the record before us, there is insufficient evidence to ground a finding that it would be in the children’s best interest to be placed in Mr. VonHe-gel’s cus…
-
Richmond v. Richmond, 537 So. 2d 1039 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)…order unless the court’s subject matter jurisdiction has been properly invoked by appropriate pleadings, proper service of process has been had and there is given proper notice and an opportunity to be heard on that issue. See Schnicke v. Schnicke, 533 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). The father has a right to seek modification of the final judgment, but he must do so by appropriate pleadings and then bear the heavy burden of proving the necessary change of circumstances as would warrant the change of custody…
-
Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Porbansky, 569 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…urisdiction has been properly invoked by appropriate pleadings and that invoked jurisdiction has been perfected by the proper service of process and due process notice and an opportunity to be heard on that issue has been had.” Schnicke v. Schnicke, 533 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); In Interest of D.F.W., 497 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); see also Ward, supra. This rule does not change just because the enforcement proceeding is brought under Chapter 88 rather than Chapter 61. See §§ 61.14, 61.17, 88.041,…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Cortina v. Cortina, 98 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 1957)
- In the Interest of D.F.W. Jr. Dep't OF H.R.S. v. Devel F. Wesley, 497 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)