Nobile v. Nobile

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nobile v. Nobile

722 So. 2d 848, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14401, 1998 WL 821858

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 12, 1998

DocketNo. 98-397

StatusPublished

This text of 722 So. 2d 848 (Nobile v. Nobile) 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

Nobile v. Nobile, 722 So. 2d 848, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14401, 1998 WL 821858 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court did not depart from the essential requirements of law by refusing to exercise subject matter jurisdiction over Mr. Nobile’s petitions concerning visitation and custody of the party’s minor children. The children have continually resided with their mother, respondent, either in Georgia or Tennessee, since the dissolution of marriage entered in Leon County on December 11, 1996. The first of Mr. Nobile’s petitions came more than one year after the final judgment of dissolution. The fact that the Florida trial court entered a judgment of dissolution does not in and of itself provide a basis for jurisdiction under section 61.1308, Florida Statutes (1997). See Snider v. Snider, 686 So.2d 802 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Here, petitioner has completely failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of section 61.132, Florida Statutes (1997), concerning subject matter jurisdiction. Respondent, on the other hand, brought a proceeding in hér present home state, Tennessee, and in bringing that proceeding, complied with the affidavit requirements of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act.

PETITION DENIED.

ERVIN, MINER, and KAHN, JJ., Concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court did not depart from the essential requirements of law by refusing to exercise subject matter jurisdiction over Mr. Nobile’s petitions concerning visitation and custody of the party’s minor children. The children have continually resided with their mother, respondent, either in Georgia or Tennessee, since the dissolution of marriage entered in Leon County on December 11, 1996. The first of Mr. Nobile’s petitions came more than one year after the final judgment of dissolution. The fact that the Florida trial court entered a judgment of dissolution does not in and of itself provide a basis for jurisdiction under section 61.1308, Florida Statutes (1997). See Snider v. Snider, 686 So.2d 802 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Here, petitioner has completely failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of section 61.132, Florida Statutes (1997), concerning subject matter jurisdiction. Respondent, on the other hand, brought a proceeding in hér present home state, Tennessee, and in bringing that proceeding, complied with the affidavit requirements of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act.

PETITION DENIED.

ERVIN, MINER, and KAHN, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

722 So. 2d 848, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14401, 1998 WL 821858, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nobile-v-nobile-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack