CLAUDIA HERRERA-FRIAS, APPELLANT,
v.
JESUS FRIAS, 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.
Claudia Herrera-Frias appealed a dissolution judgment challenging equitable distribution, child custody, and child support awards. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding that the appellant's failure to provide a trial transcript and her willful violation of court orders (fleeing to Mexico with the children) severely hampered meaningful review and justified the trial court's award of sole parental responsibility to the compliant parent.
The court affirmed the judgment. The trial court properly exercised its discretion in awarding sole parental responsibility to the compliant parent when the mother willfully violated a pretrial order requiring return of children to Florida jurisdiction. The equitable distribution judgment contained nothing incorrect or contrary to Florida law. Child custody and support decisions were upheld despite limited appellate review due to the missing transcript.
[1] An appellate court's review of a trial court's decision is limited when the record on appeal does not contain a transcript of the proceedings.
[2] The burden is on the appealing party to provide a complete record, including a transcript, to enable appellate review of challenged rulings.
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“When a parent is in willful violation of a pretrial order addressing the removal of the children from the jurisdiction of the court, it is well within the discretion of the trial court to award sole responsibility to the parent who is properly before the court and compliant with the orders of that court.”
Establishes the legal standard that trial courts have discretion to award sole parental responsibility when a parent violates removal orders
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceClaudia Herrera-Frias was married to Jesus Frias and had three children together. Prior to entry of final judgment, she willfully disobeyed a court or…
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 Appellate Record Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw
Claudia Herrera-Frias appeals the judgment of dissolution of her marriage to Jesus Frias. She challenges the trial court’s decisions relating to equitable distribution. She also challenges the trial court’s decision to award her husband sole parental responsibility for the three children of the marriage while giving her limited contact with the children. Finally, she challenges the trial court’s calculation of child support.
The record in this case does not contain a transcript of the final hearing. As a result, we do not know what evidence the trial court considered when making its decision. We gave Ms. Herrera-Frias an opportunity to provide this court with a transcript, but she has failed to provide a transcript. It appears likely that neither party arranged for that hearing to be recorded.
The record reflects that Ms. Herrera-Frias has not complied with the judgment on appeal. Prior to the entry of the final judgment, she willfully disobeyed a court order, fleeing to Mexico with her three children. She has not returned the children to the United States, despite the fact that at least one of the children is a United States citizen. This court presumably had the authority to dismiss this appeal because of her noncompliance. See Gazil v. Gazil, 343 So.2d 595 (Fla.1977). We have not dismissed the appeal because we are aware that proceedings are pending in Mexico seeking the return of these children to the United States and we want that court to have confidence that this court has accorded a full measure of due process to Ms. Herrera-Frias.
Concerning equitable distribution, we note that the judgment on appeal requires that all property of the marriage in the United States be sold and the proceeds divided equally between the parties. It identifies certain property in Mexico, some of which is awarded to Ms. Herrera-Frias. Although our ability to review the equitable distribution is extremely limited without a transcript, there is nothing in the judgment on appeal that would appear to be incorrect or not in accordance with Florida law.
Concerning child custody and child support, again our review is hampered by Ms. Herrera-Frias’s failure to take the steps necessary to provide a rec*735ord to this court.1 Under Florida law, it was her responsibility to take those steps if she wished to challenge a decision by the trial court that was dependent upon the evidence and arguments before that court. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.200(e); Carney v. Carney, 861 So.2d 1272 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). When a parent is in willful violation of a pretrial order addressing the removal of the children from the jurisdiction of the court, it is well within the discretion of the trial court to award sole responsibility to the parent who is properly before the court and compliant with the orders of that court.
Affirmed.
DAVIS, C.J., and BLACK, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Gazil v. Gazil, 343 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 1977)
- Jenise Carney v. Carney, 861 So. 2d 1272 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)