LINDSAY SIMMONS, APPELLANT,
v.
STEVEN J. SIMMONS, APPELLEE
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 appellate court vacated a temporary custody order because it was improperly issued without notice to the non-resident mother. The court found the father's emergency motion lacked sufficient grounds for an ex parte order, particularly regarding allegations of child abuse.
No, the order was erroneously entered without notice to the mother, and the father's allegations were insufficient to grant emergency jurisdiction for a permanent change in custody.
[1] A temporary injunction or restraining order and temporary custody award entered without notice to a party, or with insufficient notice or opportunity to be heard, is reve…
[2] Allegations of mistreatment and abuse occurring outside of Florida are insufficient to establish emergency jurisdiction for a permanent change in custody under section 61…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the order on appeal should be vacated because it was erroneously entered without notice to the mother, under circumstances where no sufficient reason was supplied not to give the mother notice, and without reasons why it was entered without notice, as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610(a)(2).”
Establishes the primary reason for reversing the lower court's order.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA father obtained an emergency injunction and temporary custody order for the parties' child without providing notice to the non-resident mother. The …
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 Temporary Child Custody cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by the non-resident mother of a non-final order, granting an emergency injunction/restraining order and awarding temporary custody of the parties’ child to the resident father. The father has conceded that the order on appeal should be vacated because it was erroneously entered without notice to the mother, under circumstances where no sufficient reason was supplied not to give the mother notice, and without reasons why it was entered without notice, as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610(a)(2).
This court and others have consistently reversed temporary custody orders entered without notice to one of the parties, or with insufficient notice, or with insufficient opportunity to be heard. See Shaw v. Shaw, 696 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Loudermilk v. Loudermilk, 693 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Wilson v. Roseberry, 669 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).1 Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith.
GLICKSTEIN, GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur. . It is also clear that the allegations of the father’s emergency motion for ex parte injunction/restraining order and temporary custody were insufficient to give the trial court emergency jurisdiction under section 61.1308(l)(c) 2, Florida Statutes (1995), for a permanent change in custody because there were no allegations of mistreatment and abuse occurring in Florida at the time of the filing of the petition. See Nelson v. Nelson, 433 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).
As the mother contends, the father's allegations — that the child had been abused in. New Mexico and the abuse would continue upon his return to the mother there — could permit a Florida court at most to take jurisdiction to enter a temporary protective order which would preserve the status quo long enough for the father to apply for a change in permanent custody from a court in the state determined to have jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act. Id. at 1019.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
FEE v. Usler, 761 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…opinion. . See, e.g., Lewis v. Lewis, 725 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (reversing order transferring temporary custody to father, where father’s motion failed to satisfy requisites which would permit entry of emergency order); Simmons v. Simmons, 698 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (reversing entry of ex parte order, and stating that in absence of true emergency, temporary custody orders entered without notice to one of the parties, or with insufficient notice, or with insufficient opportunity to be heard,…
-
Jones v. Jones, 761 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…attorney did not certify as to any efforts to contact Roy. The mere allegation that the children could be removed by Roy before notice could be given to him is an insufficient basis to show why notice should not be required. See Simmons v. Simmons, 698 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Third, the motion fails to set forth facts demonstrating that a true emergency existed or that immediate and irreparable injury of loss was likely had the injunction not been issued without notice.4 In addition, the court’s ord…1 / 2
-
Stanley-Baker v. Baker, 789 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…hild without affording prior notice to the opposing party or an opportunity to be heard. Shaw v. Shaw, 696 So. 2d 391, 392 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (citation omitted); accord Brouard v. McLean, 753 So. 2d 601, 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Simmons v. Simmons, 698 So. 2d 947, 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). This court has explained that a true emergency situation might arise where, for example, a child is threatened with physical harm or is about to be improperly removed from the state. Shaw, 696 So. 2d at 392. (citations omit…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wilson v. Blaine Alan Roseberry, 669 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Nelson v. Nelson, 433 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Loudermilk v. Loudermilk, 693 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
- Shaw v. Shaw, 696 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)