JUANITA K. MILLER, APPELLANT,
v.
REGNEL V. MILLER, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellate Review Of Discretionary Rulings cases and more on FLexlaw
BOYER, Chief Judge.
Appellant seeks review of that portion of a final judgment in a dissolution of marriage action which awarded custody of the two minor children of the parties to appel-lee. Our examination of the record reveals evidence upon which the trial judge could have awarded custody to either parent or to neither. Although we may well have arrived at a different conclusion, it is not our prerogative to substitute our opinion for that of the trial judge if there is competent evidence in the record to sustain his determination. (Please see Dinkel v. Dinkel, Sup.Ct.Fla.1975, 322 So. 2d 22 and Spradley v. Spradley, Sup.Ct.Fla.1976, 335 So. 2d 822)
Appellant’s petition for award of attorney’s fees incident to this appeal is denied.
AFFIRMED.
MILLS, J., concurs.
McCORD, J., dissents.
McCORD, Judge
(dissenting).
In my view this case is not controlled by the two Supreme Court opinions cited in the majority opinion. Here the evidence is clear that it was not in the minor children’s best interest that they be placed in the custody of appellee. I therefore, dissent.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pfaffko v. Pfaffko, 559 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…ff'd, 508 So. 2d 330 (Fla.1987). As her fifth point on appeal, the wife contests the award to the husband of primary residential custody of the two minor children of the marriage. We find no abuse of discretion in this regard. See Miller v. Miller, 342 So. 2d 85, 86 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), cert. denied, 354 So. 2d 983 (Fla.1977). Affirmed. FRANK and THREADGILL, JJ., concur. . While the second point on appeal also appears to assert error in the consideration given to the wife’s nonmarital assets in determini…
-
Brock v. Brock, 349 So. 2d 782 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)…al judge. We are not at liberty, however, to substitute our judgment for his absent a demonstrated abuse of discretion. The decision of our Supreme Court in Dinkel v. Dinkel, Fla., 322 So. 2d 22, and that of this Court in Miller v. Miller, Fla.App., 342 So. 2d 85 require that the judgment appealed from be affirmed. However, in doing so we do not ignore Appellant’s contention that: “There is only one issue before this Court and that is to decide whether perjury and fraud are to be rewarded, condoned and san…
-
In re The Marriage of Betty Diane Strickland v. Strickland, 509 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…’s decision that the best interests of the child would be better served with the father as primary residential parent. See Dinkel v. Dinkel, 322 So. 2d 22, 24 (Fla.1975); Rogers v. Rogers, 490 So. 2d 1017, 1018 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Miller v. Miller, 342 So. 2d 85 (Fla. 1st DCA), cert. denied, 354 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 1977). Accordingly, the trial court’s custody determination is affirmed. JOANOS, THOMPSON and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Dinkel v. Dinkel, 322 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 1975)
- Spradley v. Elvera Correne Spradley, 335 So. 2d 822 (Fla. 1976)