Sokol v. Sokol

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sokol v. Sokol

763 So. 2d 568, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 10146, 2000 WL 1114282

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 9, 2000·No. No. 3D00-540·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the father, John Sokol, from the trial court order which makes the mother, Barbara Sokol, the primary residential parent of the parties’ minor child. Although there are certain errors contained in the Report and Recommendations of the General Master, which was ratified by the trial court, our review of the record does not reveal that there was an abuse of discretion in the decision to make the mother primary residential parent. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Fullerton v. Fullerton, 709 So.2d 162, 163 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). The general master correctly applied the criteria of section 61.13, Florida Statutes (1997), in determining who should be the primary residential parent, and the trial court therefore properly ratified the recommendation. We thus affirm the order on appeal. The issue of child support is not ripe for appeal as no specific amount has been awarded at this time.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the father, John Sokol, from the trial court order which makes the mother, Barbara Sokol, the primary residential parent of the parties’ minor child. Although there are certain errors contained in the Report and Recommendations of the General Master, which was ratified by the trial court, our review of the record does not reveal that there was an abuse of discretion in the decision to make the mother primary residential parent. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Fullerton v. Fullerton, 709 So.2d 162, 163 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). The general master correctly applied the criteria of section 61.13, Florida Statutes (1997), in determining who should be the primary residential parent, and the trial court therefore properly ratified the recommendation. We thus affirm the order on appeal. The issue of child support is not ripe for appeal as no specific amount has been awarded at this time.

Affirmed.

Sokol v. Sokol, 763 So. 2d 568, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 10146, 2000 WL 1114282 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

763 So. 2d 568 (Sokol v. Sokol) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related