KATHLEEN DORAN, FORMER WIFE, APPELLANT,
v.
GERARD M. DORAN, JR., FORMER HUSBAND, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed trial court's time-sharing modification order because the trial court erroneously excluded evidence of alleged child abuse that was relevant to the best interests determination.
A trial court errs by excluding evidence of alleged child abuse when determining whether modification of a time-sharing schedule is in the best interests of the child.
[1] Evidence of child abuse is relevant and admissible in determining whether modification of a time-sharing schedule is in the best interests of the child under Florida law.
Previewing 1 of 1 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“A time-sharing schedule may not be modified without showing a "substantial, material, and unanticipated change in the circumstances and a determination that it is in the best interests of the child."”
Statement of the legal standard governing time-sharing modifications under Florida Statute § 61.13(3)
Ms. Doran sought to modify a time-sharing schedule for her minor children with their father, Mr. Doran, and attempted to present evidence of abuse all…
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 Substantial And Material Change In Circumstances cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, Ms. Kathleen Doran, appeals an order of the trial court granting time-sharing of her minor children to the children’s father, Appellee, Mr. Gerard Doran. Ms. Doran asserts that the trial court erred by not allowing the presentation of evidence regarding why modification of the time-sharing schedule was not in the minors’ best interests. We agree and reverse for the reasons set forth below.
A time-sharing schedule may not be modified without showing a “substantial, material, and unanticipated change in the circumstances and a determination that it is in the best interests of the child.” § 61.13(3), Fla. Stat. (2010). Evidence of child abuse is relevant to the best interests determination. § 61.13(3)(m), Fla. Stat. Here, Ms. Doran sought to offer evidence of abuse of the children by Mr. Doran, namely: (1) testimony from Investigator Adkinson regarding the children’s allegation of abuse by their father; (2) two Department of Children and Families investigators regarding the alleged abuse; (3) testimony from the children or an in camera hearing with the children; and (4) Investigator Procino’s report. The trial court did not permit Ms. Doran to present this evidence which clearly would be relevant to a determination whether modification of the time-sharing schedule was in the best interests of the minor children. This was error. Accordingly, we reverse and remand.
Reversed and Remanded.
BENTON, C.J., WETHERELL and ROWE, JJ., concur.