ANGELICA PEREZ F/K/A ANGELICA REVEIZ, APPELLANT,
v.
LUIS F. REVEIZ, 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 a family law matter, the mother appealed the trial court's judgment modifying custody and visitation in favor of the father, as well as the denial of her post-judgment motions. The appellate court affirmed the custody modification and denial of post-judgment motions but reversed the award of attorney's fees without a proper entitlement determination.
The court affirmed the custody modification, finding it supported by competent, substantial evidence of a substantial change in circumstances and that modification served the best interests of the children. The court affirmed the denial of post-judgment motions as not an abuse of discretion. However, the court reversed the attorney's fees award because the trial court failed to hold a proper hearing on entitlement before awarding fees.
[1] A trial court's modification of custody and visitation is affirmed when supported by competent, substantial evidence of a substantial change in circumstances and a findin…
[2] A trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying post-judgment motions to vacate and for rehearing when credibility issues are resolved in favor of the opposing par…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“We affirm the trial court's decision to modify which was based upon its findings of a substantial change in circumstances and that modification was in the children's best interests. The findings were supported by competent, substantial evidence.”
Establishes the standard for affirming custody modifications and the court's reliance on substantial evidence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe mother appealed a trial court judgment that modified custody and visitation in favor of the father based on a substantial change in circumstances …
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 Best Interests Of The Children cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, Angelica Perez f/k/a Angelica Reveiz (“the mother”), appeals the trial court’s final judgment granting appellee, Luis F. Reveiz’s (“the father”), counter-petition to modify custody and visitation and the denial of her motion to *102vacate and for rehearing. We affirm the trial court’s decision to modify which was based upon its findings of a substantial change in circumstances and that modification was in the children’s best interests. The findings were supported by competent, substantial evidence. We also affirm the trial court’s denial of the mother’s post-judgment motions to vacate and for rehearing. Resolving credibility issues in favor of the father, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the mother’s motions.
In her last issue, the mother argues the trial court erred in determining in its final judgment that the father was entitled to attorney’s fees. At the final hearing, the father’s attorney told the court he was seeking attorney’s fees and costs for what he considered frivolous and vexatious litigation by the mother. The attorney was sworn in and testified to the amount he billed and his rate per hour. The court then told counsel that the final judgment should include a reservation on the attorney’s fees issue and that they set a hearing before a general master on the issues of entitlement and amount. However, in the final judgment, there was a finding that the father was entitled to attorney’s fees and it ordered that a hearing be held before a general master to determine the total amount due. The father concedes the determination of entitlement to attorney’s fees made in the final judgment was error. We reverse and remand for a hearing on the father’s entitlement to attorney’s fees and the amount, if any.
Affirmed in Part; Reversed in Paid and Remanded.
HAZOURI, CIKLIN and LEVINE, JJ„ concur.