In Re Marriage of Hughes v. Hughes
Trial court properly applied §767.325 where mother brought removal action and father countered with motion to change placement.
Trial court properly applied §767.325 where mother brought removal action and father countered with motion to change placement.
Trial court does not have authority to change placement within two years of the initial placement order, absent finding of harm, if the modification would substantially alter the time a parent spends with the child.
Portion of divorce judgment effecting a prospective change in placement is invalid. Trial court lacks statutory authority to order a change of placement that is prospective and contingent on the occurrence of some anticipated event.
Parents do not have a fundamental right to equal placement after divorce – state’s regulation of post-divorce custody disputes is constitutional.
Award of primary placement to father reversed as trial court’s opinion of the stability of non-marital relationships based on other paternity cases is not sufficient to support a factual finding that the mother’s specific living situation in this case is unstable.
Modification of custody affirmed where mother had notice that custody was an issue and made no objection so she waived any claim.