Can a Florida Judge Issue an “Emergency” Order Restricting a Parent’s Visitation Rights?
Children are often caught in the middle when their parents divorce. This can lead to situations where the judge overseeing the divorce may decide that one parent’s actions threaten the child’s physical or emotional well-being. In such scenarios, the judge can take the extraordinary step of modifying an existing timesharing (custody and visitation) order without the need to conduct a full, formal hearing.
“Grave Concerns” Over Mother’s False Abuse Allegations Led to Suspension of Visitation Rights
A recent decision from the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeals, Capps v. Capps, provides a helpful real-world example. This case involves an ongoing divorce between the parents of four minor children. Due to the contentious nature of the litigation, the trial judge appointed a guardian ad litem (GAL), i.e., an attorney to represent the children’s interests.
After consulting with the GAL, the trial court issued an order granting shared parental responsibility to both parents. A few weeks later, the mother filed an emergency motion to suspend the husband’s timesharing, alleging the father was somehow harming the children. The father replied that the mother had actually tried to fabricate a false child abuse claim by subjecting the children to unnecessary and invasive medical testing.
At a subsequent status conference, the judge heard from the GAL and the father’s attorney. The judge initially planned to defer a decision until conducting a full hearing with the mother’s counsel present. But after reflecting on the case overnight, the next day the judge issued a written order temporarily suspending the mother’s timesharing due to “grave concerns” that she had initiated multiple investigations based on unfounded allegations against the father. This, in turn, created an “emergency need to protect the children from grave danger and psychological trauma.”
The mother appealed this order. The Fourth District affirmed the trial court’s decision, however, holding there was no violation of the mother’s constitutional right to due process. The appellate court explained that trial judges have an “inherent authority to protect children.” This includes issuing emergency orders when a child is “exposed to substantial emotional abuse or trauma by a parent or custodian.”
Here, the trial court’s record established the judge had “grave concerns” that the mother had exposed her children to “emotional abuse or trauma” by attempting to manufacture evidence of abuse by the father. In particular, the Fourth District noted the trial court had the benefit of the GAL’s testimony, which corroborated many of the claims raised by the father and his counsel. This gave the trial court “sufficient basis” to issue the emergency order.
Contact a Port St. Lucie Child Custody & Timesharing Attorney Today
Parents strive to do what is right by their children. But in the midst of a contested divorce, it is important to remember that the court’s first duty is to protect the children and not the parents. As a parent, however, you still have certain legal rights. Our Port St. Lucie child custody and timesharing lawyers can help you protect those rights. Contact Baginski Brandt & Brandt today at 772-466-0707 to schedule a confidential consultation.
Source:
scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17989633068459182321
