Castellvi v. Alvarez

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Castellvi v. Alvarez

619 So. 2d 326, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4971, 1993 WL 139758

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 4, 1993

DocketNo. 93-153

StatusPublished

This text of 619 So. 2d 326 (Castellvi v. Alvarez) 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

Castellvi v. Alvarez, 619 So. 2d 326, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4971, 1993 WL 139758 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

Astonishingly enough, after the decision in Alvarez v. Alvarez, 566 So.2d 516 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), the mother and child in question moved back from New Jersey to Miami. In these circumstances, it is apparent, not only that the Dade County Court had jurisdiction over the custody proceeding under Section 61.1308, Florida Statutes (1989), Yurgel v. Yurgel, 572 So.2d 1327 (Fla.1990); Alvarez, 566 So.2d at 518-19 (indicating that Florida had concurrent jurisdiction even though child was in New Jersey), but that Florida is now the eminently “convenient forum,” § 61.1316, Fla. Stat. (1989), in which the issue should be tried. Compare Alvarez, 566 So.2d at 519-20 (holding that Florida was then an “inconvenient forum” so that jurisdiction must be deferred to New Jersey where the child then resided). Hence, we reject the mother’s present challenge to the jurisdiction of the lower court.

We similarly find no error in the visitation order entered below.¹ See Yandell v. Yandell, 39 So.2d 554 (Fla.1949); Saenz v. Saenz, 602 So.2d 973 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), review denied, 613 So.2d 8 (Fla.1992).

Affirmed.

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

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

Astonishingly enough, after the decision in Alvarez v. Alvarez, 566 So.2d 516 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), the mother and child in question moved back from New Jersey to Miami. In these circumstances, it is apparent, not only that the Dade County Court had jurisdiction over the custody proceeding under Section 61.1308, Florida Statutes (1989), Yurgel v. Yurgel, 572 So.2d 1327 (Fla.1990); Alvarez, 566 So.2d at 518-19 (indicating that Florida had concurrent jurisdiction even though child was in New Jersey), but that Florida is now the eminently “convenient forum,” § 61.1316, Fla. Stat. (1989), in which the issue should be tried. Compare Alvarez, 566 So.2d at 519-20 (holding that Florida was then an “inconvenient forum” so that jurisdiction must be deferred to New Jersey where the child then resided). Hence, we reject the mother’s present challenge to the jurisdiction of the lower court.

We similarly find no error in the visitation order entered below.¹ See Yandell v. Yandell, 39 So.2d 554 (Fla.1949); Saenz v. Saenz, 602 So.2d 973 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), review denied, 613 So.2d 8 (Fla.1992).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

619 So. 2d 326, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4971, 1993 WL 139758, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/castellvi-v-alvarez-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack