Allison Martin Perry

held that husband's failure to provide a transcript or statment of the evidence or proceedings from the best available means precluded appellate review.

The DCA held that evidence supported finding that buisness was a marital assets, competent, substantial evidence supported the trial court's valuation of business at approximately $359,000, husband's insurance proceeds were assigned properly.

The District Court of Appeal held that alimony modification order failed to contain carefully crafted conditions necessary for prospective modifications.

The final judgment was reversed in part and the case was remanded to the trial court fro the entry of an amended time sharing schedule. In all other aspects the final judgment is affirmed.

The DCA held the neither trial courts findings of need nor the amount of alimony constitued an abuse of discretion, award of permanent alimony addressing husband's ability to pay.

The trial court is required to account income tax when calculating former wife's needs, the GM and circuit court were required to use most recent figures of wife's investments in calculating alimony obligations.

the DCA heal that the trial court erred when basing its decision soly on biology rather than the best interest of the child.

The DCA judge held that mother suffered irreperable harm as result of order such that certiorari relief was warrented.

The District Court of Appeal, held that allocation of uncovered medical, vision, and dental expenses for minor children should have been in same percentage as child support obligation.

The Appellate Court reversed the final judgment and remanded the case for consideration on the relocation issue.

Trial court's inconsistanct findings were insuficient to support unequal distribution of marital assets funds borrowed against husband's life insurance policy from his father were not marital debt.

The trial court shall consider the father's request for fees and cost.

the DCA held the the record did not support a temporary support order for husband to pay wife, in addition to a certain amount per week, any and all normal and customary expenses associated with the marital home.

The DCA held that the Trial Court failed to make specific findings supporting its alimony awarded, which precluded review and required remand for further proceedings.

The DCA held that the trial court failed to make neccessary findings in alimony award, failed to make findings identifying identifying marital liabilities and was required to consider tax in the valuation of the IRA

The DCA held that the errors in the visitation provision necessitated remand for future proceedings.

The DCA held that the trial court abused its descretion in denying father's motion without a hearing.

The DCA held that the mediation agreement was a fuill and complete settlement which superseded the antenuptial agreement

The DCA held that clear and convincing evidence supported finding that birth father abandond child, as required to support termination of his parental rights.

The DCA held that trial court denied husband's due process rights when it entered injunction for protection without affording husband opportunity to be heard.

The DCA held that evidence was insufficient to support the value assighned to townhouse, trial court abused its discretion when it included the value of vehicle in assets to wife.

Adoption agency is obliged to practice timely due diligence in order to preserve rights of potential father prior to placing child.

The held that did no thave resonable expectation of privacy, relocation staute did not violate mother's fundamental right to travel or abtain court permission to do so, the equal protection clause was not violated.

The DCA held that attorney's testimony that she had been paid in full was not an appropriate basis for denying former wife attorney fees.

the DCA held that pediatrician to Authorize inoculation in absence of parties' agreement, and that there was insufficient evidence to support trial court's order that children be educated in public school.

Wife was required to file motion within 30 days, trial court did not abuse discretion, wife failed to demonstrate excusable neglect for the 30 day extension, Attorney fee motions did not apply.

Wife's entitlement to share of husband's military pension was not enforceable by contempt. ambiguity in final judgment is required remand.

The DCA held that orders facilitating grandparent visitation over father's objections violated his right to privacy.

The DCA held that the Former Wife is required to obtain approval to relocate children, trial court maintains jurisdiction, stipulation of substitute visitation is contingent on fathers continued meaningful relations with children.

Child support obligations were required to be recalculated based on each party's net income, child's uncovered medical expenses were to be recalculated based on the parties respective income.

Former Husband's petition for modification is denied, Former Wife's motion to enforce is granted

Reversal of written visitation schedule entered by trial court was required, also parties must contibute equally to private school expenses of their children.

The DCA held that it was error to include depleted marital assets in the distribution cheme bcaus eht ehusband liquidated personal retirement accounts during pendency.

DCA held that trial court abused its discretion in modifying custody without making any finding that custodial parent's actions constituted detriment to child.

The DCA held that the wife did not make irrevocable waiver of all modification of alimony in separation agreement.

The District Court of Appeal, held that award of $25,000 in temporary attorney fees to wife was not an abuse of discretion.

the DCA held that there was a lack of substantial competent evidence to support trial court's finding that moving child's residence was in child's best interest.

The DCA held that trial court erred by failing to address issue of outstanding temporary child support in final judgment.

the DCA held that order granting wife $750 per month in perminant alimony was adequatly supported by trial court's consideration of statutory factors. also evidence supported use of wife's income figures for purposes of calculating alimony.

The DCA held thatto adress best interst of the child factors was reversable, child was to remain in fathers temporary custody pending rehearing.

The District Court of Appeal held the trial court errerd in its judgment to reinstate life insurance policy with out evaluating cost of policy and husband's insurability.

expert testimony to determined the husbands level of income based on level of experience is insufficient to determine child support.

The summary judgment was affirmed in favor of C.A.T.

The DCA held that sole custody determination was not abuse of discretion, evidence did not support requiring supervised visitation, father received a fair trial.

The District Court of Appeal, held that statute providing for grandparent visitation rights when one or both parents of child are deceased was unconstitutional.

The DCA held that former husband had waived or abandoned the claim

The DCA held that finding the ex-husband was voluntarily underemployed was proper, but imputed income was limited to his probable income based on his employment.

Order Quashed

The DCA held that husband was entitled to evidentiary hearing on motion to set aside or reform the MSA based on mutual mistakes.