Dynes v. Dynes

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dynes v. Dynes

584 So. 2d 210, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 8511, 1991 WL 158555

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 20, 1991

DocketNo. 91-479

StatusPublished

This text of 584 So. 2d 210 (Dynes v. Dynes) 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

Dynes v. Dynes, 584 So. 2d 210, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 8511, 1991 WL 158555 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We agree with the former wife’s claim here that the findings of the general master’s report were not supported by substantial competent evidence. Furthermore, the report, adopted by the trial court, recommending that the former wife and the parties’ seven-year-old son be prohibited from relocating from Broward to Orange County, misapplies our holdings in Hill v. Hill, 548 So.2d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), review denied, 560 So.2d 233 (Fla.1990) and Sherman v. Sherman, 558 So.2d 149 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). For both these reasons, it is clear that the trial court erred in denying the wife’s exceptions to the report and in ordering the parties to abide by the recommendations made.

[211]*211Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order denying the motion to relocate. The motion is granted, and the cause is remanded for the establishment of an appropriate plan of visitation.

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

PER CURIAM.

We agree with the former wife’s claim here that the findings of the general master’s report were not supported by substantial competent evidence. Furthermore, the report, adopted by the trial court, recommending that the former wife and the parties’ seven-year-old son be prohibited from relocating from Broward to Orange County, misapplies our holdings in Hill v. Hill, 548 So.2d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), review denied, 560 So.2d 233 (Fla.1990) and Sherman v. Sherman, 558 So.2d 149 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). For both these reasons, it is clear that the trial court erred in denying the wife’s exceptions to the report and in ordering the parties to abide by the recommendations made.

[211]*211Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order denying the motion to relocate. The motion is granted, and the cause is remanded for the establishment of an appropriate plan of visitation.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

584 So. 2d 210, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 8511, 1991 WL 158555, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dynes-v-dynes-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack