Purvis v. Carver

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Purvis v. Carver

326 So. 2d 40, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14240

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 30, 1976

DocketNo. 75-1020

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 326 So. 2d 40 (Purvis v. Carver) 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

Purvis v. Carver, 326 So. 2d 40, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14240 (Fla. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellee sought and obtained modification of visitation privileges with his four year old son whose custody had been awarded to appellant, the child’s mother. There was no proof that the increased visitation privileges would be in the best interests of the child’s welfare. To the contrary, all of the proof on that issue tended to establish that an increase in appellee’s visitation rights would be detrimental to the child’s welfare. Recognizing the wide discretion vested in the trial judge in matters of this type, we reluctantly conclude that the order enlarging appel-lee’s visitation rights was an abuse of discretion and is therefore reversed.

Reversed.

OWEN and DOWNEY, JJ., and LEE, J. CAIL, Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellee sought and obtained modification of visitation privileges with his four year old son whose custody had been awarded to appellant, the child’s mother. There was no proof that the increased visitation privileges would be in the best interests of the child’s welfare. To the contrary, all of the proof on that issue tended to establish that an increase in appellee’s visitation rights would be detrimental to the child’s welfare. Recognizing the wide discretion vested in the trial judge in matters of this type, we reluctantly conclude that the order enlarging appel-lee’s visitation rights was an abuse of discretion and is therefore reversed.

Reversed.

OWEN and DOWNEY, JJ., and LEE, J. CAIL, Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

326 So. 2d 40, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/purvis-v-carver-fladistctapp-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack