ROCHESTER SOUTHWELL
v.
MARY SOUTHWELL
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 does not err in denying timesharing to a parent who fails to complete the statutorily required Parent Education and Family Stabilization Course when the statute authorizes such denial as a sanction for non-compliance.
[1] A trial court may excuse a party from attending or completing a statutorily required parenting course in a dissolution of marriage proceeding for good cause.
[2] Failure to complete a statutorily required parenting course in a dissolution of marriage proceeding may result in a parent being held in contempt, denied shared parental…
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“The court may hold any parent who fails to attend a required parenting course in contempt, or that parent may be denied shared parental responsibility or time-sharing or otherwise sanctioned as the court deems appropriate.”
Florida Statutes § 61.21(9) describing available sanctions for non-compliance with parenting course requirement
Rochester Southwell and Mary Southwell divorced and had one minor child. The former husband failed to complete the mandatory parenting class before fi…
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 Good Cause Exception cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
ROCHESTER SOUTHWELL,
Appellant,
v.
MARY SOUTHWELL,
Appellee.
No. 2D23-641
March 22, 2024
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Alissa M. Ellison, Judge. Rochester Southwell, pro se.
Mary Southwell, pro se.
SILBERMAN, Judge.
Rochester Southwell (the Former Husband), pro se below and on appeal, challenges a final judgment that dissolves his marriage to Mary Southwell (the Former Wife). The parties have one minor child, and the Former Husband argues that the trial court erred in not awarding timesharing to him when he had failed to complete a statutorily required parenting class. Because the Former Husband has not demonstrated reversible error, we affirm the final judgment. Section 61.21(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2021), mandates that each party to a dissolution of marriage proceeding that involves minor children "shall complete the Parent Education and Family Stabilization Course before the entry by the court of a final judgment." The statute requires a petitioner to "complete the course within 45 days after the filing of the petition." § 61.21(5). However, "[t]he court may excuse a party from attending the parenting course, or from completing the course within the required time, for good cause." § 61.21(4)(b). Each party must "file proof of compliance with this subsection with the court prior to the entry of the final judgment." § 61.21(5). With respect to the failure of a party to comply, the statute provides that "[t]he court may hold any parent who fails to attend a required parenting course in contempt, or that parent may be denied shared parental responsibility or time-sharing or otherwise sanctioned as the court deems appropriate." § 61.21(9). It is undisputed that the Former Husband did not complete the required parenting course. The trial court awarded shared parental responsibility but denied timesharing to the Former Husband as section 61.21(9) allows. We note that in the final judgment the trial court also alerted the Former Husband that once he filed a certificate of completion for the required parenting course, he could "file[] an appropriate motion or pleading for a best interest hearing" in order to establish timesharing with his child. Thus, the Former Husband is not foreclosed from seeking timesharing in the trial court.
Affirmed.
BLACK and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.