Alg v. Jfd
2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 5171
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 6th2012Background
- A.L.G. and J.F.D. are unmarried parents of a son born January 2008.
- J.F.D. is a longtime Florida resident; A.L.G. was stationed in Orlando with a military career.
- A relocation occurred after birth; mother notified father of relocation, and he objected while petitioning for paternity, parental responsibility, time-sharing, and child support.
- Mother moved to California in November 2008; a temporary time-sharing order with a six-week California / three-week Florida rotation was issued.
- Final hearing occurred January 2010; both parents testified about dissatisfaction with the temporary schedule and proposed alternatives.
- Trial court orally found the child lacked continuity and stability and favored more time with the mother, but ultimately ordered a six-week rotating schedule; final judgment lacked detailed time-sharing findings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the six-week rotating time-sharing schedule was an abuse of discretion. | A.L.G. argues rotation is not in the child’s best interests; excessive travel prevents stability. | J.F.D. contends the schedule works for the family and reduces travel burdens. | Yes; court abused discretion and must revisit time-sharing on remand. |
| Whether the trial court’s findings supported the time-sharing decision. | Record showed lack of continuity; six-week rotation not justified. | Court could rely on best interests and practical considerations. | Record supported stability concerns but final judgment lacked adequate findings; remand needed for current evidence. |
| Whether child support must be revisited on remand. | No error in initial award; remand permitted to adjust for changed circumstances or time-sharing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Burnett v. Burnett, 995 So.2d 519 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (abuse of discretion standard and factors in custody decisions)
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980) (reasonableness and best interests standard guiding custody orders)
- Decker v. Lyle, 848 So.2d 501 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (custody decisions require best interests focus under §61.13)
- Bader v. Bader, 639 So.2d 122 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (no required detailed factual findings in final judgment when record supports best interests)
- Austin v. Austin, 12 So.3d 314 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (remand for additional evidence due to changed circumstances or uncertain future events)