In Re Marriage of Kerr

486 So. 2d 708
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 17, 1986
Docket85-1270
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 486 So. 2d 708 (In Re Marriage of Kerr) 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
In Re Marriage of Kerr, 486 So. 2d 708 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Opinion

486 So.2d 708 (1986)

In re the MARRIAGE OF Lyndell Kevin KERR, Appellant,
v.
Debra Ann Kerr, Appellee.

No. 85-1270.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

April 17, 1986.

Devo A. Heller of Brinson, Smith, Heller & Smith, P.A., Kissimmee, for appellant.

Debra Ann Kerr, pro se.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment in a marriage dissolution case. The only point on appeal is the denial of the father's right to have overnight visitation with his twoyear old son. The trial judge ruled "(t)he husband shall not have overnight visitation with the child due to the tender years until further order of this Court."

We assume the trial judge was applying the "tender years doctrine" which has been effectively abolished in Florida by section 61.13(2)(b)(1), Florida Statutes (1983) which provides:

Custody and Support of Children; Visitation Rights; Power of Court in Making Orders.
... It is the public policy of this state to assure each minor child frequent and continuing contact with both parents after the parents have separated or dissolved their marriage and to encourage parents to share the rights and responsibilities of child rearing. Upon considering all relevant factors, the father of the child shall be given the same consideration as the mother in determining custody without regard to the age of the child.

There was no evidence in the record that the father was unable to care for his child overnight and he was certainly willing to do so. It was error to deny the father and the child their visitation.

The judgment is affirmed in all respects except the denial of the overnight visitation.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.

COBB, C.J., and ORFINGER, J., concur.

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

Related

Johnson v. Adair
884 So. 2d 1169 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Andrade v. Dantas
776 So. 2d 1080 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Adamson v. Chavis
672 So. 2d 624 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Cherradi v. Lavoie
662 So. 2d 751 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Saucier v. Willis
656 So. 2d 252 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Kuutti v. Kuutti
645 So. 2d 80 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Ketola v. Ketola
636 So. 2d 850 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
DeCamp v. Hein
541 So. 2d 708 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
486 So. 2d 708, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-marriage-of-kerr-fladistctapp-1986.