Summary
The Sixth District Court of Appeal of Florida reverses and remands an amended supplemental final judgment modifying a long-distance parenting plan. The court held that the trial court failed to make findings that the change in circumstances was substantial, material, and unanticipated as required under the applicable version of section 61.13(3), Florida Statutes. The court affirmed on all other grounds and instructed the trial court to determine whether the existing record supports the required findings or whether further proceedings are necessary.
Holdings
- Before modifying a parenting plan under section 61.13(3), Florida Statutes (2022), the trial court must make findings addressing a substantial, material, and unanticipated change in circumstances and determine that the modification is in the child's best interests.
- An appellate court may not make the omitted factual findings in the first instance.
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court was required to make findings that the circumstances had undergone a substantial, material, and unanticipated change before modifying the parenting plan.
- Whether the appellate court could make the omitted factual findings in the first instance.
- Whether the amended supplemental final judgment should be reversed and remanded.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (4)
- Hull v. Hull, 273 So. 3d 1135, 1139 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)(followed)
- Romeo v. Romeo, 310 So. 3d 1064, 1065 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020)(followed)
- Davis v. Davis, 363 So. 3d 1213, 1214 (Fla. 6th DCA 2023)(followed)
- Douglass v. Buford, 9 So. 3d 636, 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…