Saucier v. Willis

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Saucier v. Willis

656 So. 2d 252, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8956, 1995 WL 348298

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 12, 1995·No. No. 94-3041·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ERVIN, Judge.

The trial court abused its discretion in restricting visitation between appellant and his son “[bjased on the child’s youth.” Kerr v. Kerr, 486 So.2d 708 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). And see Ketola v. Ketola, 636 So.2d 850 (Fla. 1st DCA) (section 61.13(2)(b)l, Florida Statutes, abolished the “tender years” doctrine), review dismissed, 649 So.2d 233 (Fla.1994). We therefore reverse and remand with directions for the lower court to grant liberal visitation to appellant.

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

MINER and BENTON, JJ., concur.

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

ERVIN, Judge.

The trial court abused its discretion in restricting visitation between appellant and his son “[bjased on the child’s youth.” Kerr v. Kerr, 486 So.2d 708 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). And see Ketola v. Ketola, 636 So.2d 850 (Fla. 1st DCA) (section 61.13(2)(b)l, Florida Statutes, abolished the “tender years” doctrine), review dismissed, 649 So.2d 233 (Fla.1994). We therefore reverse and remand with directions for the lower court to grant liberal visitation to appellant.

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

MINER and BENTON, JJ., concur.

Saucier v. Willis, 656 So. 2d 252, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 8956, 1995 WL 348298 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

656 So. 2d 252 (Saucier v. Willis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related