EDWARD W. MASLOW, APPELLANT,
v.
JULIANNE M. EDWARDS, 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.
In this paternity case, the appellate court reversed the trial court's award of sole parental responsibility to the mother because the trial court failed to make the specific statutory finding that shared parental responsibility would be detrimental to the child before awarding sole responsibility.
The trial court erred by failing to make the specific statutory finding that shared parental responsibility would be detrimental to the child before awarding sole parental responsibility to the mother. The statute requires such a finding before sole responsibility can be awarded, and merely finding that sole responsibility is in the child's best interest does not satisfy this requirement.
[1] An appellate court must affirm a judgment that is not fundamentally erroneous in the absence of an adequate appellate record, such as a transcript.
[2] Review on appeal is limited to errors of law apparent on the face of the record when no transcript of the proceedings is provided.
Previewing 2 of 5 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 court shall order that the parental responsibility for a minor child be shared by both parents unless the court finds that shared parental responsibility would be detrimental to the child.”
States the statutory mandate governing parental responsibility awards in Florida
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEdward Maslow appealed a final order establishing paternity, parental responsibility, and child support. The trial court found that the father had fai…
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 Adequate Record On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, J.
Edward W. Maslow (“father”) appeals a final order establishing paternity, parental responsibility, and child support.
In this case, there is no transcript of the proceedings. The appellant bears the burden of demonstrating error, and in the absence of an adequate record on appeal, a judgment that is not fundamentally erroneous must be affirmed. Bryant v. Bryant, 882 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Without a transcript of the proceedings below, review is limited to errors of law that are apparent on the face of the record. Fugina v. Fugina, 874 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004).
We find that only one of Maslow’s arguments has merit: that the trial court erred in awarding sole parental responsibility of the minor child to the mother. Section 61.13(2)(b)2, Florida Statutes, provides:
The court shall order that the parental responsibility for a minor child be shared by both parents unless the court finds that shared parental responsibility would be detrimental to the child.
Trial courts are required to make a specific finding of detriment to the child before awarding sole parental responsibility. Grimaldi v. Grimaldi, 721 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). This requirement applies in paternity actions. See, e.g., Doyle v. Owens, 881 So. 2d 717 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Moore v. Trevino, 612 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Additionally, utilizing the best interest of the child standard does not obviate the necessity of a specific finding that shared parental responsibility would be detrimental to the child before awarding sole parental responsibility to a parent. Hicks v. Hicks, 511 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Nichols v. Nichols, 432 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).
In the instant case, the trial court found that the father had failed to make efforts to visit the child since November 1999, and in ordering supervised visitation, it required that the father abstain from illegal drugs and alcohol within 12 hours of visitation. Although the trial court stated that for the reasons provided, it was in the best interest of the child for the mother to have primary residential custody, it never made the specific finding that shared parental responsibility would be detrimental to the child. See Grimaldi 721 So. 2d at 821-822 (holding that findings that the former wife, due to an illness, was not capable of exercising parental responsibility in any meaningful way and that sole parental responsibility was in the child’s best interests, were not equivalent to a finding that shared parental responsibility would be detrimental to the child).
Accordingly, we reverse the portion of the order awarding the mother sole parental responsibility and remand so that the trial court may make a finding regarding whether shared parental responsibility is detrimental to the child. On remand the trial court may, in its discretion, take additional evidence or rule on the record presently available.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.
GRIFFIN and PLEUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Mohamed S. Rashid v. Shanta Rashid, 35 So. 3d 992 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…699 So. 2d 811, 812 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Griffin v. Griffin, 665 So. 2d 352, 352-53, (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Longo v. Longo, 576 So. 2d 402, 402 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (citing Hicks v. Hicks, 511 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)); see also Maslow v. Edwards, 886 So. 2d 1027, 1028 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (applying the statute and the requirement of appropriate findings to paternity actions). The trial court did not make the necessary finding in the final judgment. We note, parenthetically, that Wife requested primary reside…
-
Aranda v. Linnette Padilla, 216 So. 3d 652 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)…all order that the parental responsibility for a minor child be shared by both parents unless the court finds that shared parental responsibility would be detrimental to the child.” “This requirement applies in paternity actions.” Maslow v. Edwards, 886 So. 2d 1027, 1028 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). The award of sole parental responsibility in the absence of such a finding is reversible error, Schram v. Schram, 932 So. 2d 245, 250 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). “Additionally, utilizing the best interest of the child standard do…
-
Abbas Pazouhandeh v. Salgar Constr. Co., 112 So. 3d 151 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)…t forth in Pazouhandeh’s brief. Pazouhandeh argues that the court improperly determined the prevailing party issue. Without a transcript of the hearing, our review is limited to errors appearing on the face of that judgment. See Maslow v. Edwards, 886 So. 2d 1027, 1028 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). As there are no such errors, we affirm. AFFIRMED. GRIFFIN and SAWAYA, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hicks v. Hicks, 511 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Nichols v. Nichols, 432 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- Moore v. Cezar Trevino, 612 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
- Grimaldi v. Grimaldi, 721 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- Fugina v. Fugina, 874 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- Bryant v. Bryant, 882 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- Kylie C. Doyle v. Owens, 881 So. 2d 717 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)