Culpepper v. Culpepper, 81-1330
| Decision Date | 13 January 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-1330,81-1330 |
| Citation | 408 So.2d 782 |
| Parties | Brenda Ann CULPEPPER, Appellant, v. James William CULPEPPER, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Rick S. Lockenbach of Bay Area Legal Services, Inc., New Port Richey, for appellant.
Norman Johnson Stewart, Jr. and W. Lowell Bray, Jr. of Allgood, McPherson, Stewart, Bray & Misemer, New Port Richey, for appellee.
This is an appeal from an order changing the custody of the parties' minor child.
During their marriage Mr. and Mrs. Culpepper had one child, Alan, who was born on August 23, 1975. Subsequently, they divorced on March 26, 1977. The judgment of dissolution incorporated a settlement agreement which gave custody of Alan to Mrs. Culpepper with Mr. Culpepper having the right to reasonable visitation. On June 20, 1980, Mr. Culpepper filed a petition for modification of custody. Following a hearing, the court directed that he have permanent custody of the child.
In order to properly decide the case, it is necessary to consider the facts in depth. Mrs. Culpepper testified that she had been the sole custodial parent of Alan except for a few weeks when she was suffering from the complications of a pregnancy which resulted in the birth of a child, Dawn, out of wedlock, on March 28, 1980. She said that later in 1980 for several months Alan had visitation with his father from Wednesday until Sunday of each week. These arrangements ceased, and the visitation was changed from Friday to Sunday when Alan transferred from a parochial school for which his father paid to a public school closer to Mrs. Culpepper's home.
Mrs. Culpepper testified that she had begun working as a cashier at a convenience store in February 1981 and had since been promoted from clerk to assistant manager. She said that because of her employment she was able to take care of her children's material needs including insurance. She worked from 6:00 a. m. to 4:00 p. m. two days a week and from 3:00 p. m. to 11:00 p. m. three days a week. She lived in a three bedroom mobile home with her two children, her mother, and her nine year old sister. She stated that either her mother or a girl friend who also had a child took care of Alan and Dawn while she was working.
Mrs. Culpepper admitted that for one month during the year prior to the hearing, she had allowed an unmarried man to live in the mobile home with his daughter because he had lost his lease and had nowhere to go. She denied having sexual relations with him. She also denied ever having an abortion. Finally, she stated that she was engaged in no regular activities other than her work and caring for her family.
Mrs. Culpepper's mother testified that she had resided with her daughter since the end of January 1981, that they shared expenses equally, and that Mrs. Culpepper had been well able to provide for the material needs of her son. She also spoke of the affection between Alan and his sister Dawn.
Mr. Culpepper testified that he had exercised primary custodial care of Alan for a month during the time of Mrs. Culpepper's pregnancy complications. He said he changed jobs recently and now worked for Paradyne Electronics. He stated that if he were granted custody, his parents would be in a position to take care of Alan when he was absent at his work. He admitted that when he had been in the service, he sometimes did not provide total support because of his neglect to fill out dependency allotment papers. He also admitted to having habitually used marijuana in the past, sometimes in Alan's presence. However, he said he had given this up and had not smoked marijuana for over a year. Finally, he testified that Mrs. Culpepper had told him that at some time she had an abortion.
Debra West, a counselor for the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services who was responsible for preparing a home study in the case, was qualified as an expert in child welfare. She testified that when she did her study, the Wednesday-Sunday visitation was in effect. Thus, she had recommended "split custody" in her home study report. She said, however, that because this visitation had changed so that Mr. Culpepper was seeing his son considerably less hours of the week, she would now recommend that Mrs. Culpepper remain the primary custodial parent. She gave as reasons for her recommendation that she favored continuity and believed that Alan was looking to his mother as the custodial parent. She said she had no reservations concerning Mrs. Culpepper's suitability as a parent because the child...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mast v. Reed
...So.2d 487 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989) (Sharp, W., J., dissenting); Crippen v. Crippen, 508 So.2d 1339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Culpepper v. Culpepper, 408 So.2d 782 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); Stricklin v. Stricklin, 383 So.2d 1183 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).8 See Britt v. Shovein, 559 So.2d 749 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); ......
-
SD v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILD. AND FAMILY
...(Fla. 4th DCA 1997), review denied, 697 So.2d 509 (Fla.1987); Jablon v. Jablon, 579 So.2d 902 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Culpepper v. Culpepper, 408 So.2d 782 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); Young v. Hector, 740 So.2d 1153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)(Schwartz, C.J., dissenting), review dismissed, 763 So.2d 1046 (Fla.2......
-
McIntyre v. McIntyre, AN-449
...at 439. To similar effect are Johnson v. Johnson, supra; Lisenby v. Lisenby, 419 So.2d 354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Culpepper v. Culpepper, 408 So.2d 782 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). In Stricklin v. Stricklin, 383 So.2d 1183 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), the court, The order changing custody need not include a f......
-
Mize v. Mize
...serves the best interests of the children.").12 See, e.g., Crippen v. Crippen, 508 So.2d 1339 (Fla. 4th DCA1987); Culpepper v. Culpepper, 408 So.2d 782 (Fla. 2d DCA1982); Stricklin v. Stricklin, 383 So.2d 1183 (Fla. 5th DCA1980).13 See, e.g., Ferguson v. Baisley, 593 So.2d 319, 320 (Fla. 4t......