JACQUELINE BOWERS
v.
HAROLD N. SMITH
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 trial court cannot suspend timesharing based on relief not requested by the requesting party.
[1] A trial court may not grant relief not requested by the party seeking that relief, even in the context of family law timesharing matters.
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“it granted relief not requested by Former Husband”
Court's reasoning for reversing the timesharing suspension order
Jacqueline Bowers (Former Wife) appealed from a February 8, 2022 order suspending her timesharing in a custody dispute with Harold N. Smith (Former Hu…
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.
PER CURIAM.
Former Wife appeals an order rendered February 8, 2022, suspending her timesharing.1 On appeal, Former Wife argues, inter alia, that this order is in error because it granted relief not requested by Former Husband, citing Golden v. Bass, 194 So. 3d 1080, 1082 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). We agree and therefore reverse this order.
We affirm the order transferring venue without further discussion. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED. EVANDER, WALLIS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.