KATHERINE D. LEWTER, APPELLANT,
v.
LARRY D. LEWTER, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1987-06-10
No. 4-86-3059
HERSEY, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and WALDEN, JJ., concur.
508 So. 2d 47 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1987) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The mother of the minor child, whose marriage to the child’s father was dissolved in Florida in 1980, when all resided here, appeals from a November 1986 order which denies the mother’s motion for contempt based upon non-support by the father and which grants the father’s motion as to visitation.

We affirm that portion of the trial court’s order which denied the mother’s motion to hold the father in contempt.

However, we reverse and quash that portion of the order which addresses the father’s visitation with the minor child, because of the Florida court’s lack of jurisdiction. The child and mother had resided in Virginia for 5V2 years at the time of the hearing and order in this case; and the father had not resided in Florida since 1982, living first in Oklahoma and now in the state of Washington. See Hegler v. Hegler, 383 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).

HERSEY, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and WALDEN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • McGLAMRY v. McGLAMRY, 608 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
    …all, we hold that this court has subject matter jurisdiction to review the trial court order of June 17, 1992, insofar as it vacates a previous order allowing appellant/father biweekly visitation with the couple’s child. See e.g., Lewter v. Lewter, 508 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Calderon v. Torres, 445 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Also, we do not believe that review is premature, in that the June 17 order does, at least for some period of time, vacate or terminate visitation altogether. Thus, appella…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw