Under Florida law, courts making timesharing decisions must base their determinations on the child’s best interests, supported by substantial evidence. When a court’s decision relies on speculative or unsupported assumptions, it risks reversal. A recent Florida decision illustrates the need for competent evidence when ordering significant changes to a child’s living arrangement. If you are involved in a custody dispute, it is wise to consult a Miami child custody attorney to ensure your rights are safeguarded.
Case Setting and History
It is reported that the mother and father disputed custody over their daughter, born in 2017, with the mother moving to Florida with the child shortly after birth. Allegedly, in 2021, the father filed for paternity and timesharing rights in Florida, seeking to establish a legal relationship with the child. Reportedly, the mother counterclaimed, seeking sole custody and alleging the father had engaged in abusive behavior, resulting in a domestic violence injunction.
Allegedly, the court initially ordered shared parental responsibility and temporary timesharing, permitting the father visitation during school breaks. The case ultimately proceeded to trial in 2023. It is reported that at trial, witnesses testified to issues related to the father’s alcohol use, lack of a driver’s license, and financial instability. The guardian ad litem recommended that the child remain in Florida with the mother, citing concerns about the father’s ability to serve as the primary caregiver. Nonetheless, the court granted the father majority timesharing in Michigan, contingent on him securing certain improvements in his living situation.
Evidence in Child Custody Cases
On appeal, the Florida court reviewed whether the trial court’s decision was supported by substantial evidence or if it relied on speculative assumptions about the father’s future circumstances.
Under Florida Statutes § 61.13(3), a court must consider multiple factors, including stability, financial security, and the child’s established routine, when making timesharing determinations. However, as the court emphasized, future-oriented or hypothetical assumptions about a parent’s potential to improve conditions are insufficient grounds for altering custody.
Here, the court found that the trial court’s decision was based largely on speculation that the father’s circumstances would improve. For example, the trial court hypothesized that the father could rely on friends or ride-sharing services for transportation despite his lack of a driver’s license due to multiple DUI convictions.
Additionally, while the guardian-ad-litem testified that the father’s current circumstances were unstable, the trial court speculated he could make necessary changes to provide a stable environment without concrete evidence supporting this possibility.
The court held that Florida law requires a decision to be based on present, substantiated evidence, not on projected improvements in a parent’s circumstances. Given that the guardian-ad-litem and other testimony highlighted stability concerns in Michigan, the court concluded that the trial court’s ruling to relocate the child to Michigan was an abuse of discretion. As such, the court reversed the timesharing decision and remanded for further proceedings, instructing the lower court to base any custody changes on current, verifiable evidence of each parent’s ability to serve the child’s best interests.
Confer with a Knowledgeable Miami Family Law Attorney
Child custody matters must be decided based on reliable, current information to serve a child’s best interests. If you are involved in a custody dispute, you should talk to an attorney promptly. The knowledgeable Miami child custody attorneys at the Law Offices of Sandy T. Fox, P.A. can gather the evidence needed to provide you with a strong chance of a favorable result. You can reach us at 800-596-0579 or use our online form to arrange a consultation.