Barker v. Barker

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Barker v. Barker

838 So. 2d 704, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 2898, 28 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 667

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 7, 2003

DocketNo. 5D02-1027

StatusPublished

This text of 838 So. 2d 704 (Barker v. Barker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barker v. Barker, 838 So. 2d 704, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 2898, 28 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 667 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Wade Barker appeals a final judgment awarding him custody of the parties’ two minor children, B.F.B. and K.A.B. He alleges, inter alia, that the trial court’s judgment confused the names of the two children, that there were omissions on the visitation schedule attached to the final judgment and that the court further erred in not entering an income deduction order. Brenda Barker does not dispute these claims.

We affirm the trial court’s custody determination and reverse for correction of judgment in regard to the names of the two children and the omissions on the visitation schedule. We further direct the trial court to file an income deduction order against the mother pursuant to section 61.1301, Florida Statutes (2002).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

PETERSON, PALMER and TORPY, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Wade Barker appeals a final judgment awarding him custody of the parties’ two minor children, B.F.B. and K.A.B. He alleges, inter alia, that the trial court’s judgment confused the names of the two children, that there were omissions on the visitation schedule attached to the final judgment and that the court further erred in not entering an income deduction order. Brenda Barker does not dispute these claims.

We affirm the trial court’s custody determination and reverse for correction of judgment in regard to the names of the two children and the omissions on the visitation schedule. We further direct the trial court to file an income deduction order against the mother pursuant to section 61.1301, Florida Statutes (2002).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

PETERSON, PALMER and TORPY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

838 So. 2d 704, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 2898, 28 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 667, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barker-v-barker-fladistctapp-2003.