Roberts v. Davis, 75--993
| Decision Date | 24 March 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 75--993,75--993 |
| Citation | 328 So.2d 879 |
| Parties | Bonita F. ROBERTS, Appellant, v. Harold Jerome DAVIS and wife, Frances B. Davis, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
John W. Burton, Wauchula, for appellant.
W. Daniel Kearney of Kearney, Matthews & Mulock, Bradenton, for appellees.
Bonita Roberts, the natural mother of Troy and Deanna Davis, minors, appeals from the award of visitation privileges given appellees-paternal grandparents in a final judgment which otherwise denied a petition to adopt said minors brought by the grandparents. The grandparents cross-appeal the denial of the adoption.
We reject the cross-appeal and affirm the denial of the petition; but we are compelled to reverse the judgment insofar as it seeks to confer visitation rights on the grandparents. That portion of the order is unjustified and unenforceable. 1
Accordingly, the cause is remanded for deletion of the visitation privileges awarded appellees. In all other respects the judgment should be, and it is hereby, affirmed.
Reversed in part; affirmed in part.
1 See Jones v. Allen (Fla.App.2nd, 1973), 277 So.2d 599. Cf., Sheehy v. Sheehy (Fla.App.2nd, 1975), 325 So.2d 12 and cases cited therein.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Behn v. Timmons
...1967); Rodriguez v. Rodriguez, 295 So.2d 328 (Fla.3rd DCA 1974); Sheehy v. Sheehy, 325 So.2d 12 (Fla.2nd DCA 1975); and Roberts v. Davis, 328 So.2d 879 (Fla.2nd DCA 1976). Although the author of this opinion is not in accord with the foregoing principle of law expressed, it is logical that ......
-
Bopp v. Lino
...hinder, proper parental authority. See generally 59 Am.Jur.2d Parent and Child § 36 (1987 & Supp.1993); see also Roberts v. Davis, 328 So.2d 879 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1976) (reversing lower court's grant of visitation rights to paternal grandparents); Carlson v. Carlson, 16 Wash.App. 595, 558 P.......
- U.S. Fire Ins. Co. v. Adt Sec. Servs., Inc., 2D12–1956.
- U.S. Fire Ins. Co. v. ADT Sec. Servs., Inc.