DESIREE NICOLE BAILEY, THE FORMER WIFE, APPELLANT,
v.
MICHAEL ANDREW BAILEY, THE FORMER HUSBAND, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2017-10-16
No. CASE NO. 1D17-453
ROBERTS, WETHERELL, and ROWE, JJ., CONCUR.
227 So. 3d 768 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2017) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

In this post-dissolution appeal, we agree with the former wife that the trial court erred in requiring the parties to equally split the responsibility of transportation for timesharing because that issue was not pled or tried by consent. Accordingly, we reverse that portion of the challenged order. In all other respects, we affirm the order.1

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.

ROBERTS, WETHERELL, and ROWE, JJ., CONCUR.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Jektor Ayala v. Jarisel Vega (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)
  • Jektor Ayala v. Jarisel Vega (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)
    …ation issue by consent, thus violating his due process rights. See Romero v. Brabham, 300 So. 3d 665, 668 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020) (“Granting unrequested relief absent proper notice is a violation of due process.”) (citations omitted); Bailey v. Bailey, 227 So. 3d 768, 768 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (“[W]e agree with the former wife that the trial court erred in requiring the parties to equally split the responsibility of transportation for timesharing because that issue was not pled or tried by consent.”). We disagree…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw