Roselli v. Roselli

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Roselli v. Roselli

780 So. 2d 284, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 2461, 2001 WL 219147

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 7, 2001

DocketNo. 4D00-3972

StatusPublished

This text of 780 So. 2d 284 (Roselli v. Roselli) 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

Roselli v. Roselli, 780 So. 2d 284, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 2461, 2001 WL 219147 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court’s order denying a change of venue from Broward County to Palm Beach County in this modification of child custody case is affirmed. Venue was proper in Broward County as the original final judgment was entered there. See § 61.13(2)(e), Fla. Stat. (2000). Other petitions in this case regarding child custody were filed and litigated in Broward County. Although the parents and children all now reside in south Palm Beach County, the father works in Broward County. While the mother claims that all of the witnesses are located in Palm Beach County, the record does not disclose how all of the listed witnesses would give relevant testimony to the issues to be litigated or how the witnesses would be substantially inconvenienced by attending the litigation in Broward County. See R.C. Storage One, Inc. v. Strand Realty, Inc., 714 So.2d 634 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). On this record, we cannot conclude that the trial court abused its discretion. See Instrumentation Servs., Inc. v. Data Mgmt. Assocs., Inc., 708 So.2d 1018 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).

Affirmed.

WARNER, C.J., FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court’s order denying a change of venue from Broward County to Palm Beach County in this modification of child custody case is affirmed. Venue was proper in Broward County as the original final judgment was entered there. See § 61.13(2)(e), Fla. Stat. (2000). Other petitions in this case regarding child custody were filed and litigated in Broward County. Although the parents and children all now reside in south Palm Beach County, the father works in Broward County. While the mother claims that all of the witnesses are located in Palm Beach County, the record does not disclose how all of the listed witnesses would give relevant testimony to the issues to be litigated or how the witnesses would be substantially inconvenienced by attending the litigation in Broward County. See R.C. Storage One, Inc. v. Strand Realty, Inc., 714 So.2d 634 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). On this record, we cannot conclude that the trial court abused its discretion. See Instrumentation Servs., Inc. v. Data Mgmt. Assocs., Inc., 708 So.2d 1018 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).

Affirmed.

WARNER, C.J., FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

780 So. 2d 284, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 2461, 2001 WL 219147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roselli-v-roselli-fladistctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack