First District Finds Appeal Moot in International Custody Dispute

The First District Court of Appeal today found the appeals filed in Garces v. Legarda to be moot.  In short, the Appellant moved to Florida from Ecuador with the parties’ children, allegedly under false pretenses and without leave to do so.  The Appellee filed petitions for the return of the children, and there was no request for affirmative relief filed by the Appellant in Florida.  The Court ordered the children returned to the Appellee, who returned to Ecuador and dismissed his pending petition, leaving the Appellant with no legally cognizable interest remaining in the outcome of the appeal, as even reversal would grant her no relief.

First District Reverses Bridge-the-Gap Award

The First District Court of Appeal today affirmed the bulk of the lower court’s ruling in Franks v. Franks, but found error in the lower tribunal’s award of bridge-the-gap alimony for a three year period, a year longer than the statute permits.

Fifth District Reverses Over Distance

The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed today in Tucker v. Liebknecht, a case in which the lower court issued an  injunction preventing a move after finding it exceeded the relocation restriction in the parties’ agreement.  That agreement didn’t specify a method of measuring the distance set, however, and the Fifth District found that the plain meaning thus resulted in a calculation not of driving distance, but radius in miles, contrary to the method used by the lower court.

Third DCA Reverses Relocation Order

The Third District Court of Appeal reversed today in Guzzardi v. Guzzardi, a case in which relocation was permitted post-judgment.  While the Court found no reversible error in the Court’s use of Florida Statute 61.13001 (2011) despite the existence of an order specifically governing future relocation, it did find error in the fact that there was no evidence permitting a finding that a substantial change in circumstances had occurred.

Third District Court Reverses Modification

The Third District Court of Appeal reversed today in Silverman v. Silverman, a case in which a 22 year old divorce decree was modified to increase the alimony originally awarded on the basis of a cost of living increase.  The Court reversed on the basis that, while an increase in the cost of living may be relevant to the amount of a modification, it does not prove that the modification is warranted in the first place. 

First District Reverses Finding of Laches and Estoppel

The First District Court reversed yesterday in D.O.R. ex rel Thorman v. Holley, a case in which the lower tribunal’s findings of laches and estoppel excused the Father’s obligation to pay past-due child support.  While there was clearly a long period of delay involved, the District Court found that the lower tribunal applied laches and estoppel without sufficient evidence and erred in vacating a final order establishing arrearages due to a violation of due process.  In short, the Court found that there was insufficient evidence of prejudice to establish laches or estoppel, and that, in essence, as there was no evidence of prejudice there was no basis to remedy a violation of due process by relieving a parent of the obligation to pay support.

First DCA Reverses Modification Order

The First District Court of Appeal reversed yesterday in Hentze v. Denys, first affirming the lower court’s departure from its interim orders on the grounds that the Former Husband’s argument invoking the law of the case doctrine was misplaced, in that there was no appeal to have set the law of the case, and the lower court’s failure to grant interest on a judgment awarded, in that the issue was not raised in a motion for rehearing.  Merit was found, however, in the Former Husband’s arguments that the Court was required to impute income to the Former Wife, who voluntarily resigned her position, and in apparently granting child support beyond the age of nineteen.