CAROLINE SEDKY, APPELLANT,
v.
SAMEH IBRAHIM, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Parenting Plan cases and more on FLexlaw
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
We grant appellant’s motion for rehearing and/or clarification, withdraw our previous opinion, and substitute the following in its place.
Caroline Sedky, the wife, appeals the final judgment of dissolution of marriage. In its final judgment, the lower court stated that the parties’ children could travel to Egypt if both parents consent. However, in the court’s parenting plan, the court ordered that the children “shall not” travel to Egypt. As these two statements are inconsistent with one another, we remand for the lower court to clarify the final judgment and parenting plan. See Justice v. Justice, 80 So.3d 405, 407 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); see also Pope v. Langowski, 115 *81So.3d 1076, 1077 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (remanding for clarification where the parenting plan was inconsistent). We find the remaining issues on appeal to be without merit and affirm without comment.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
Gerber, Levine and Klingensmith, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Zackery L. Stokes v. Sakeenah A. Stokes, 210 So. 3d 242 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…we are unable to resolve these inconsistencies from the face of the record. Hence, we must reverse and remand for further proceedings for the trial court to enter an order that is consistent throughout. See Sedky v. Ibrahim, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2665, 211 So. 3d 80, 2017 WL 192030 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 30, 2016) (remanding for clarification of the final judgment and parenting plan due to inconsistent statements); see also Justice v. Justice, 80 So. 3d 405, 407 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (remanding for entry of a consist…
Authorities Cited
- Justice v. Justice, 80 So. 3d 405 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- Lindgren v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co., 115 So. 3d 1076 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)