Lee v. Lee
Decision Date | 31 January 1950 |
Citation | 43 So.2d 904 |
Parties | LEE v. LEE. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Dowda & Millican, Thos. B. Dowda, Harriette C. Pomeroy, Palatka, and Evan T. Evans, Jacksonville, for Petitioner.
Gray, Waldo, Chandler & Mills, Gainesville, for Respondent.
Pertinent provisions of a final decree entered by the Circuit Court of Alachua County, Florida, on March 7, 1949, in the case of Ethel W. Lee v. Frank A. Lee held: First, the equities of the cause were with the plaintiff (Ethel W. Lee); second, Ethel W. Lee was divorced from Frank A. Lee; third, the custody of Patricia Ann Lee and James Green Lee, children of the parties, was awarded to the plaintiff mother, Ethel W. Lee; fourth, 'that the defendant, Frank A. Lee, is herein and hereby granted the right of reasonable visitation with said children at reasonable hours and he is, until the further order of this Court, herein and hereby granted the right to have said children with him on every Sunday afternoon between the hours of 2:00 and 7:00 o'clock p.m., said right to include the privilege of taking said children away from their home; fifth, paragraph five of the final decree, supra, referred to and made plaintiff's Exhibit 'I', being a property settlement agreement signed by the litigants, was retified and approved and by reference made a part of the final decree. The petition for interlocutory certiorari refers to paragraph 5 of the stipulation attached to the amended bill of complaint and the following language thereof: seventh, the Court retained jurisdiction to make and enter subsequent orders in the cause authorized by law.
On April 29, 1949, Frank A. Lee filed in the Circuit Court of Alachua County, Florida, his motion for a modification of the final decree originally entered in the cause under date of March 7, 1949. He alleged (1) that Ethel W. Lee was an unfit person to have the custody of the children; (2) she had not cared for the children in a decent, orderly and proper manner; (3) that Ethel W. Lee had stated that she did not like the terms of the final decree and did not intend to comply with its provisions; (4) the father was subjected to abusive language by the different members of the household, where the children were kept by the mother, when he called for them on each Sunday, as provided for in the final decree; (5) the health of the children was endangered in their maintenance by Ethel W. Lee; (6) Ethel W. Lee had stated that she intended to leave Gainesville with the children for the purpose of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bell v. Bell
...father by the mother by her arbitrary or capricious conduct, then the same can or may be adjudicated in a contempt proceeding. Lee v. Lee, Fla.1950, 43 So.2d 904. But the amended final decree is devoid of a requirement that the mother must keep the children in this state. It is therefore al......
-
Julian v. Julian, 6595
...Recitals, not Findings.2 Rudolph v. Rudolph, Fla.App.1962, 146 So.2d 397; Hurst v. Hurst, 1946, 158 Fla. 43, 27 So.2d 746; Lee v. Lee, Fla.1950, 43 So.2d 904. ...
-
Fishman v. Fishman
...with the parties' minor child. Petitioner concedes that civil contempt may be used to enforce child visitation orders. Lee v. Lee, 43 So.2d 904 (Fla.1950); DeMauro v. State, 632 So.2d 727 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). As a direct result of Petitioner's refusal to comply with the visitation order, Res......
- Simpson v. Simpson