McCormick v. Norman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McCormick v. Norman

453 So. 2d 515, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 1691, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13962

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 1, 1984

DocketNo. 83-581

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 453 So. 2d 515 (McCormick v. Norman) 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

McCormick v. Norman, 453 So. 2d 515, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 1691, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13962 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order enforcing an Ohio child custody modification decree but otherwise declining to exercise modification jurisdiction over this matter. See §§ 61.1328 and 61.133, Fla.Stat. (1981). We agree with the trial court’s conclusion that appellant should exhaust her legal remedy in the state of Ohio through disposition of her pending motion for rehearing and by possible appeal from any adverse ruling. See § 61.1314, Fla.Stat. (1981). Under the particular circumstances presented, appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error, or a gross miscarriage of justice resulting from the manner in which the trial court reached its findings.

AFFIRMED.

BOARDMAN, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and LEHAN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order enforcing an Ohio child custody modification decree but otherwise declining to exercise modification jurisdiction over this matter. See §§ 61.1328 and 61.133, Fla.Stat. (1981). We agree with the trial court’s conclusion that appellant should exhaust her legal remedy in the state of Ohio through disposition of her pending motion for rehearing and by possible appeal from any adverse ruling. See § 61.1314, Fla.Stat. (1981). Under the particular circumstances presented, appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error, or a gross miscarriage of justice resulting from the manner in which the trial court reached its findings.

AFFIRMED.

BOARDMAN, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and LEHAN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

453 So. 2d 515, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 1691, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13962, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccormick-v-norman-fladistctapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack