MILDRED RUCKER LITTEL IN RE INTEREST OF HOWARD DEWAYNE RUCKER, A MINOR, APPELLANT,
v.
LENA BELLE HUNNICUTT, 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.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order denying the paternal grandmother's petition to change custody of a minor child from the divorced wife of the paternal grandfather, finding substantial evidence supported the trial court's best-interests determination.
A trial court's custody determination will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear showing of error or that the evidence demonstrates the conclusions are erroneous.
[1] A trial court's factual findings regarding the best interests of a child in a custody matter will not be disturbed on appeal absent clear error or evidence demonstrating…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA paternal grandmother sought to change custody of a minor child from the appellee, the divorced wife of the child's paternal grandfather, to herself …
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 Petition For Change Of Custody cases and more on FLexlaw
McCORD, Judge.
This is an appeal from an order denying petition for change of custody of a minor child from appellee, the divorced wife of the child’s paternal grandfather, to the child’s paternal grandmother, appellant. After considering the briefs and record in the cause, we temporarily relinquished jurisdiction to the trial court for its reconsideration of the evidence in the light of Van Meter v. Murphy, Fla.App. (1st), 287 So. 2d 740, and directed that upon reconsideration, the trial court enter its further order. The trial court has now entered its supplemental order pursuant to the aforesaid directions and we have considered additional briefs and oral argument of counsel filed and made subsequent thereto. We are impressed with the findings and conclusions of the trial judge as to the best interests of the minor child. While the evidence is conflicting, the trial judge who heard the testimony was in a better position than are we to evaluate it and there is substantial evidence to support his findings and conclusions. As this court stated in Blain v. Blain, Fla.App. (1st), 214 So. 2d 521:
“. . . It is not the province of this court to substitute its judgment for that of the trier of the facts. These findings will not be disturbed in the absence of a clear showing that the trial court committed error or that the evidence demonstrates that the conclusions reached are erroneous.”
Affirmed.
RAWLS, C. J., and MILLS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Helman v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. & William A. Cagle, 349 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 1977)…dence and substitute its judgment for that of the jury. Herzog v. Herzog, Fla.Sup.Ct, 346 So. 2d 56, filed March 10, 1977; Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla.1976); Ates v. Yellow Pine Land Co., 310 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Littel v. Hunnicutt, 310 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); White v. White, 306 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Rolland v. Thompson, 305 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Cook v. Cook, 305 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Imperial Lumber Co., Inc. v. James Knowles, Inc., 267 So. 2d 53 (Fla.…
-
Horatio Enters., Inc. v. Rabin, 614 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…ence and substitute its judgment for that of the jury. Herzog v. Herzog, Fla.Sup.Ct., 346 So. 2d 56, filed March 10, 1977; Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla.1976); Ates v. Yellow Pine Land Co., 310 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Littel v. Hunnicutt, 310 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); White v. White, 306 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Rolland v. Thompson, 305 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Cook v. Cook, 305 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Imperial Lumber Co., Inc. v. James Knowles, Inc., 267 So. 2d 53 (Fla.…
-
Banco DO Brasil, S.A. v. City Nat'l Bank OF Miami, 609 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…ence and substitute its judgment for that of the jury. Herzog v. Herzog, Fla.Sup.Ct., 346 So. 2d 56, filed March 10, 1977; Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla.1976); Ates v. Yellow Pine Land Co., 310 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Littel v. Hunnicutt, 310 So. 2d 45 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); White v. White, 306 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Rolland v. Thompson, 305 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Cook v. Cook, 305 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Imperial Lumber Co., Inc. v. James Knowles, Inc., 267 So. 2d 53 (Fla.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- van Meter v. Murphy, 287 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)
- Blain v. Blain, 214 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968)