Often, contested custody cases can give rise to contempt proceedings if one parent decides not to honor the custody arrangement. This is what happened in the case of Eadie v. Gillis, 5D22-2732 (Fla. 5th DCA June 16, 2023). The father filed a motion for contempt against the mother who failed to provide the children for their scheduled visitation. In this article, we’ll take a look at the case and how it applies to Florida’s family court rules.
Background of the case
The father, in this case, filed a motion for contempt against the mother, alleging she repeatedly failed to comply with the couple’s parenting plan by denying the father his scheduled timesharing rights. The father requested compensatory (make-up) timesharing for all the time he missed due to her noncompliance. The trial court granted the father’s motion and awarded the father 13 days of make-up timesharing.
The mother appealed the decision. The question then became: Did the trial court improperly grant more make-up timesharing than what the father had explicitly requested?
The appeal
The appellate court examined the father’s motion and found that it specifically alleged that the mother denied him timesharing “several times.” The motion explicitly requested “compensatory time sharing for all the time the mother had interfered with the custody agreement. At the hearing, the father also testified that he sought “make-up timesharing for the period of January 11 through January 24. At that time, the mother made no objection to the amount of time the father sought as compensation. The appellate court concluded that, because the relief was sufficiently contained in the motion and supported by the evidence, in addition to not being challenged at the hearing, the trial court did not exceed the scope of what was sought by the father. Hence, the award of 13 days of make-up timesharing was affirmed.
Though the mother was held in contempt, she did not face any fines, incarceration, or the requirement to pay her former husband’s attorney fees. Instead, the case focused narrowly on whether or not 13 days’ worth of time with the children was over the top or right on the money.
Key takeaways
In this case, contempt for timesharing violations was remedied with make-up time. The mother was thus forced to surrender her child for 13 extra days, having denied the father his time with the children. Ultimately, that was considered a fair restitution to the father and settled the contempt charges against the mother.
Talk to a Tampa, FL, Child Custody Lawyer Today
The Tampa, FL, child custody attorneys at Westchase Law, P.A., represent the interests of parents during custody disputes. Call our Tampa family lawyers today to schedule an appointment, and we can begin discussing your next steps right away.
Source:
caselaw.findlaw.com/court/fl-district-court-of-appeal/2269080.html