PATRICIA RUSHER, APPELLANT,
v.
CHARMAINE DAVIS RICE AND JEFF RICE, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court which declined to enforce a modification of custody decree entered in North Carolina. The appellant, the maternal grandmother of the minors who are the subject of the custody decree, obtained an order in North Carolina pursuant to the North Carolina version of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act [hereinafter the Act], The order changed custody from the natural mother of the children to the maternal grandmother where the custody had been awarded the mother in a dissolution action ten months earlier. The issue before the trial court was whether the North Carolina court had jurisdiction to modify custody. § 61.1328, Fla. Stat. (1989). The court held that it would not enforce the North Carolina judgment because it was not entered under jurisdictional standards substantially in conformity with the Act. The court determined that substituted service by publication in North Carolina was not perfected. We find there was sufficient evidence to support this ruling and, accordingly, affirm the order except in one respect: We vacate that portion of the order determining that custody be awarded the mother. That issue was not raised by the pleadings nor litigated by the parties. Gligorijevic v. Gligorijevic, 427 So. 2d 1060, 1064 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). Our disposition leaves the parties in their respective positions under the custody provisions of the dissolution decree entered in North Carolina in January 1989.
Affirmed.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and LEHAN and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Keitel v. Keitel, 724 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…ement of the parties, put it in there by law.” We hold that because the issue of relocation was neither pled nor litigated, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it vacated that paragraph from the final judgment. See also Rusher v. Rice, 573 So. 2d 182, 183 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)(vaeating the portion of the trial court’s order determining that custody be awarded to the mother because that issue was not raised by the pleadings nor litigated by the parties). Finally, in the non-final appeal, appellant…
-
Dillingham v. Dillingham, 667 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…4 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (reversing the portion of the lower court’s order that required the former husband to bring the rent and utility payments current where such relief was not requested and evidence was not submitted on the issue); Rusher v. Rice, 573 So. 2d 182 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (vacating the portion of the trial court’s order declining to enforce a modification of custody decree entered in North Carolina that awarded custody to the mother where “[t]hat issue was not raised by the pleadings nor litigated…
Authorities Cited
- Gligorijevic v. Gligorijevic, 427 So. 2d 1060 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)