Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Child Custody

When a final judgment in a Florida family law case is inconsistent with exhibits such a parenting plan, confusion can follow. In the case Couture v. Couture, 1D20-2722 (Fla. 1st DCA April 1, 2021), a final judgment gave the father majority time-sharing, but the parenting plan attached did not reflect that.

An amended supplemental final judgment of dissolution of marriage was entered which, on its face, found it was in the best interest of the parties’ child for the father to have majority time-sharing and ordered the parties to abide the parenting plan attached as an exhibit to the judgment. However, the parenting plan attached to the judgment stated the father would have visitation every other weekend and the mother would have all other time-sharing not specified in the plan. The court’s findings also showed it was in the best interest of the child for the mother to have majority time-sharing. The mother appealed.

The appellate court easily determined: “Because the amended final judgment is internally inconsistent on the award of timesharing, we reverse. See Justice v. Justice, 80 So. 3d 405, 406 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (finding that the trial court erred in ordering a timesharing schedule in the final judgment that conflicted with the timesharing schedule attached as an exhibit to the final judgment).” The case was therefore remanded for the trial court to correct the final judgment to grant the mother majority time-sharing.

What appears to be a simple mistake probably cost the parties time and money to fix on appeal. Having a Florida family law attorney assisting you with your case may be a way to avoid this type of mistake. Schedule a consultation with one to discuss your case.