JOSE ANTONIO RODRIGUEZ
v.
DENNIS MARSHALL AND DEBORAH MARSHALL
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.
A circuit court's order modifying a custody agreement in favor of grandparents and denying a father's motion to terminate that agreement is affirmed, with the affirmance without prejudice to further proceedings in the event of changed circumstances.
[1] An affirmance of a custody modification order may be made without prejudice to further proceedings in the event of changed circumstances, preserving the right of a party…
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“This affirmance is 'without prejudice to further proceedings in the event of changed circumstances.'”
The court's statement regarding the scope and effect of its affirmance of the custody modification order.
Jose Antonio Rodriguez appealed a circuit court order that granted a motion by Dennis Marshall and Deborah Marshall (grandparents) to modify a custody…
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 Changed Circumstances Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
JOSE ANTONIO RODRIGUEZ, Appellant,
v.
DENNIS MARSHALL and DEBORAH MARSHALL, Appellees.
No. 4D18-2072
[December 4, 2019]
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; James L. Martz, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2016-DR-008443-
XXXX-MB.
Adam David Farber, Boynton Beach, for appellant.
Veronica Doss of Interra Law Firm, Boca Raton, for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
We affirm without further discussion the circuit court’s order granting the grandparents’ motion to modify the custody agreement and denying the father’s motion to terminate the custody agreement. This affirmance is “without prejudice to further proceedings in the event of changed circumstances.” See Williams v. Burgess, 164 So. 3d 137 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
Affirmed.
CIKLIN, GERBER and FORST, JJ., concur.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.