JESSICA RUSSELL N/K/A JESSICA WILLIAMS
v.
JOEL ARONOWICZ

Fla. 3d DCA | 2023-07-12
No. 22-1392
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2023) Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases

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.

Holding

The trial court's modification of timesharing and parental responsibility to award majority custody to the father was supported by substantial, competent evidence and was in the best interest of the child.

Headnotes

[1] Modification of a parenting plan and timesharing schedule requires a showing of a substantial, material, and unanticipated change of circumstances, with the best interest…

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
Key Quotes

“An appellate court will not disturb the trial court's custody decision unless there is no substantial, competent evidence to support the decision.”

Standard of review for custody modifications
Facts & Procedural History

The parties had a final custody judgment in 2014. In 2017, the trial court temporarily modified the arrangement to award the father majority timeshari…

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.

Opinion of the Court

GORDO, J.

The Mother1 appeals a final judgment granting the Father’s2 petition for modification for timesharing and parental responsibility of their one minor child. We have jurisdiction. Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(A). After entering a final judgment in 2014, the trial court entered a temporary modification in 2017 awarding the Father majority timesharing and parental responsibility due to the Mother’s failure to meet the minor child’s extensive mental health needs. “An appellate court will not disturb the trial court’s custody decision unless there is no substantial, competent evidence to support the decision.” Roberts v. Diaz, 343 So. 3d 156, 157 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022), reh’g denied (Aug. 17, 2022) (quoting Winters v. Brown, 51 So. 3d 656, 658 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)). “[A] modification of a parenting plan and time-sharing schedule requires a showing of a substantial, material, and unanticipated change of circumstances.” § 61.13(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2022). To modify parental responsibility “the best interest of the child shall be the primary consideration.” § 61.13(3), Fla. Stat. (2022). “The decision of the trial court comes to this court clothed in a presumption of correctness, and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate reversible error.” Corridon v. Corridon, 317 So. 3d 1198, 1201 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (quoting Chirino v. Chirino, 710

3

Footnotes
1 Jessica Russell, n/k/a Jessica Williams. 2 Joel Aronowicz.
2 So. 2d 696, 697 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)). While this Court does not have the benefit of a transcript here, the trial court’s order described that the Mother, the Father, the Guardian Ad Litem (“GAL”) and the minor child’s therapist Dr. Howard Marcus, all testified at the hearing. The trial court’s well-written order found there was a substantial, material and unanticipated change of circumstances that warranted the timesharing and parental responsibility modification and was in the best interest of the minor child. Finding no error in the trial court’s detailed seventeen-page final judgment, as it thoroughly considered the modification pursuant to the requisite twenty statutory factors listed in section 61.13(3)(a)–(t), Florida Statutes, we affirm. Affirmed.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Russell v. Aronowicz, 317 So. 3d 1198 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)
    …e to the Mother’s failure to meet the minor child’s extensive mental health needs. “An appellate court will not disturb the trial court’s custody decision unless there is no substantial, competent evidence to support the decision.” Roberts v. Diaz, 343 So. 3d 156, 157 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022), reh’g denied (Aug. 17, 2022) (quoting Winters v. Brown, 51 So. 3d 656, 658 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)). “[A] modification of a parenting plan and time-sharing schedule requires a showing of a substantial, material, and unanticipat…
    1 / 2
  • Minor St. LP v. Allen (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
    …annot know “the factual context, neither can [we] reasonably conclude that the [lower court] so misconceived the law as to require reversal.” See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979); see also Roberts v. Diaz, 343 So. 3d 156, 157 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (“We affirm because we cannot review the factual issues on appeal without a transcript of the hearings below.”); Kitchen Design Cabinets, Inc. v. Bentley, 320 So. 3d 1013, 1014 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (“Without any transcripts, w…
  • Ghina Hamad v. Hanan Sarsour (Fla. 3d DCA 2026)
    …ire reversal.”). Both orders come after material hearings for which we have no transcript, and the Parties' briefs challenge each other's reiterations of the material procedural background necessary to properly review this case. See Roberts v. Diaz, 343 So. 3d 156, 158 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (“Without a transcript of the trial court's hearings, we cannot properly resolve the factual issues on appeal."); Balaguer v. Physicians for the Hand, LLC, 199 So. 3d 375, 377 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (“Balaguer has not provided a…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw