Articles Posted in Custody/Time-Sharing

In order to temporarily modify custody in Broward County, Florida, you must show that there has been a substantial or material change in circumstances and that the modification is in the best interest of the child or children involved. There must be a factual basis sufficient to show that conditions have become materially altered since the entry of the prior custody order. In the case of Bon v. Rivera, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a Fort Lauderdale, Florida divorce judge who granted the Former Husband’s Emergency Motion for Temporary Change of Custody.

At the time of the parties divorce, the Former Wife resided in Miami-Dade County, Florida and the Former Husband resided in Broward County, Florida. The Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage that incorporated the parties’ marital settlement agreement stated that neither party shall relocate the minor children from Miami-Dade County, Broward County or the southern portion of Palm Beach County, Florida. Two years after the divorce, the Former Wife accepted a job in West Palm Beach, Florida and advised the Former Husband that she intended to move with the two minor children.

The Former Husband filed an Emergency Motion for Temporary Custody, Child Support and Attorney’s Fees alleging that the Former Wife had violated the relocation provisions of the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage. The trial court entered an order modify the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage and granting the Former Husband temporary custody. The Former Wife appealed the decision of the trial court and alleged that the trial court abused its discretion in modifying custody since there was no true emergency.

During my last post, I began to discuss if a divorce or custody court in Florida had jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Enfrocement Act (“UCCJEA”) to make an initial child custody determination. This blog post is a continuation of the case of Karam v. Karam from the Third District Court of Appeal.

On December 6, 2007, the Guadeloupe court entered an order finding that the children’s residence was determined to be the Husband’s residence and that they were to return to Guadeloupe to reside with the Husband. The Guadeloupe court specifically found that the “usual and permanent centre of the minor children’s interest” was and always had been in France, their stay in Florida (for over two years with the Wife) was “purely linguistic and cultural enrichment,”, and that the petition was filed in the French court before one was filed by the Wife in the American Court.

The Florida court dismissed the custody portion of the Wife’s petition for dissolution of marriage. The Florida court found that the facts and arguments presented were the same facts and arguments presented to the French appellate court which had affirmed the order of the French court, the Wife should not be permitted to re-litigate the custody issue in Florida, under the UCCJEA the French court’s order constitute the initial custody determination, the French courts exercised jurisdiction in substantial conformity with the UCCJEA, the French court’s determinations were made meeting the jurisdictional standards of the UCCJEA and that the Wife failed to demonstrate that the parties stay in Florida was anything other than temporary.

During divorce and paternity proceedings, Sandy T. Fox, a Fort Lauderdale attorney, can assist clients with custody and time-sharing disputes. One of the most common conflicts related to custody cases, such as those in Broward County, Florida, deals with jurisdictional competition and conflicts with courts of other states and countries pertaining to child custody and time-sharing. The divorce court can make an initial child custody determination if Florida is the home state of a child on the date that the proceedings commence.

In Karam v. Karam, the Third District Court of Appeal was presented with the issue of whether the trial court departed from the essential requirements of the law in dismissing the custody portion of the Wife’s petition for dissolution of marriage was quashed.

The parties have two children and lived in Guadeloupe until 2005. In 2005, the parties entered the USA on the Husband’s investor visa and placed their home in Guadeloupe for sale. The Husband created a corporation in Florida and opened a store in Miami, Florida. The parties purchased a $1.2 million home in Florida, obtained insurance for the residence and cars and obtained a Florida drivers license. The Wife obtained a US social security card and health insurance for the children. While the minor children attended school in Florida, they spent the holidays and summers with the parties in Guadeloupe. Although the parties resided in Miami, Florida since 2005, the parties also maintained a residence, bank accounts, vehicles and businesses in Guadeloupe.