Ingram v. Ingram

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ingram v. Ingram

578 So. 2d 386, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3528, 1991 WL 55681

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 16, 1991

DocketNo. 90-2083

StatusPublished

This text of 578 So. 2d 386 (Ingram v. Ingram) 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

Ingram v. Ingram, 578 So. 2d 386, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 3528, 1991 WL 55681 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jeffrey Lee Ingram appeals a nonfinal order transferring jurisdiction to Seminole County. We reverse.

Subsequent to the parties’ dissolution of marriage in Dade County, the trial court, on its own initiative, transferred venue for enforcement and modification proceedings to Seminole County. Because there was no factual basis furnished to the trial court to support the transfer to Seminole County, the trial court abused its discretion by transferring venue. Groome v. Abrams, 448 So.2d 82 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Taylor v. Dasilva, 401 So.2d 1161 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

[387]*387Our ruling is without prejudice to consideration of a motion to transfer venue by either party or on the court’s own motion if notice and proper evidentiary findings are provided.

Reversed.

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