RICARDO FERREIRA, APPELLANT,
v.
SUSANNA TIMOR, F/K/A SUSANNA FERREIRA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Ricardo Ferreira appeals an order denying his motion for visitation in a family law matter. The court affirmed the general master's recommendation, finding substantial competent evidence supported denying visitation pending psychological treatment, and rejecting Ferreira's challenges to expert testimony and polygraph evidence.
The court affirmed the master's order, holding that substantial competent evidence supported the findings and recommendations. The court found that the trier of fact could give polygraph evidence whatever weight it chose and could reach contrary findings based on other substantial competent evidence. The master properly evaluated expert testimony and had a substantial basis for recommending deferred visitation pending psychological treatment.
[1] Substantial competent evidence in the record supports the findings and recommendations of a general master.
[2] A stipulation admitting polygraph results into evidence does not make those results dispositive, and the trier of fact may assign them whatever weight it chooses.
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“can give exculpatory polygraph test evidence admitted upon stipulation whatever weight it chooses”
Establishes that polygraph evidence is not dispositive even when admitted by stipulation and the court has discretion in weighing it.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRicardo Ferreira sought visitation rights in a family matter. Polygraph test results were admitted by stipulation but were not agreed to be dispositiv…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Expert Testimony Evaluation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Ricardo Ferreira appeals an order approving the report and recommendation of the general master which denied a motion for visitation. After review of the record herein, we conclude that, although the matter was vigorously contested, there was substantial competent evidence supporting the findings and recommendations of the general master. Without attempting to review all of the facts, the father places emphasis on the polygraph results which were admitted into evidence by stipulation. That stipulation was only that the results could be placed in evidence, and was not a stipulation that the results were to be dispositive. The trier of fact “can give exculpatory polygraph test evidence admitted upon stipulation whatever weight it chooses ...,” Farmer v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 427 So. 2d 187, 190 (Fla.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 816, 104 S.Ct. 74, 78 L.Ed.2d 86 (1983), and may reach a factual determination contrary to the polygraph results where there is other substantial competent evidence to support the court’s finding. Id. (jury “can convict on the basis of other incriminatory evi-dence_”) (citation omitted); Coney v. State, 258 So. 2d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA) (“The weight to be given the results of the test ... was for the jury.”), cert. denied, 262 So. 2d 448 (Fla.1972). Here, there was other substantial competent evidence supporting the findings the master made.
The father strongly attacks the reliability of the testimony offered by the mother’s experts. The evaluation of the testimony of the various experts was a matter properly presented to, and resolved by, the general master. The father alternatively contends that the master should have ordered supervised visitation immediately, instead of deferring visitation pending psychological treatment and further recommendations to the court by the treating and court-appointed psychologists. The master’s recommendation follows the evaluation and recommendation of the court-appointed psychologist, the reasons for which the psychologist gave both in her report and trial testimony. There is a substantial basis in the record for the master’s recommendation on this point.
Affirmed.
*
*
This affirmance is without prejudice to the father to move for a change of the psychological program which the master ordered him to attend. We express no view on the merits of any such motion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Ala. Power Co. v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 464 U.S. 816 (U.S. 1983)
- Burke v. United States, 464 U.S. 816 (U.S. 1983)
- Farmer v. City OF Fort Lauderdale, 427 So. 2d 187 (Fla. 1983)
- Coney v. State, 258 So. 2d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
- State of Fla. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Willits, 262 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 1972)
- Vazquez v. Comutrix Corp. & Leo Greenfield, 262 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 1972)