PEDRO MENDEZ, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Perez v. Perez, 767 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
  …ted cases do not stand for that proposition. The majority opinion cites Metcalfe v. Metcalfe, 655 So. 2d 1251 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), and Elkins v. Vanden Bosch, 433 So. 2d 1251 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), see majority opinion at 516, as well as Zugda v. Gomez, 553 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). See majority opinion at 517. None of the three cases states that a showing of “detriment” is required in every modification proceeding. In Metcalfe and Elkins the discussion of “detriment” was in the context of what the evidence…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Mast v. Reed, 578 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)
  …ents who have primary residential custody of their children into harmony with those now expounded by our sister courts. See Lenders v. Durham, 564 So. 2d 1186 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Sherman v. Sherman, 558 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Zugda v. Gomez, 553 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Hill v. Hill, 548 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), rev. denied, 560 So. 2d 233 (Fla.1990); DeCamp v. Hein, 541 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 551 So. 2d 461 (Fla.1989); Bachman v. Bachman, 539 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 4th DCA 198…
• Myrtice Jane Hayes v. Hayes, 578 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
  …on does not restrict the residence of the minor child, the mere assertion that a custodial parent intends to move to a foreign state, without more, is not a substantial change in circumstances which would support a change of custody. Zugda v. Gomez, 553 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Nissen v. Murphy, 528 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). If the potential move is not a substantial change in circumstances, it is not immediate and irreparable harm justifying the entry of a temporary injunction without notice. Wit…

Authorities Cited

• United States v. Cole, 755 F.2d 748 (11th Cir. 1985)
• Bunderick v. State, 528 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)