Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Child Custody

What is a case management conference in a Florida family law case? This is a routine hearing at which the court determines the status of the case and the next steps for moving it forward. Unless all parties have been given proper notice, this type of hearing is not one at which the court can make substantive decisions about a case. This was an issue in the case Fulcher v. Allen, 6D23-957 (Fla. 6th DCA April 21, 2023).

In this paternity case, the mother was originally granted primary time-sharing with the parties’ minor child, with the father receiving substantial time-sharing. Not long after the final judgment was entered, the mother filed a motion seeking appointment of a parenting coordinator, which was agreed-to by the father. The parties would consult with the coordinator and if they were unable to resolve matters, the parenting coordinator would request a status hearing with the court. The parenting coordinator eventually requested such a hearing, citing the need for direction from the court on enforcing the father’s right to speak to the parties’ child by phone daily. After a hearing, the father was granted 100 percent custody of the child, the mother was prohibited from contacting the child, and the father was ordered to enroll the child in a school in the district in which he lived. The mother appealed after her motion for reconsideration was denied.

The appellate court held “Mother cites several grounds for overturning the lower court’s order. Only one was raised in the lower court, however, and that is the one this Court will address. Mother asserts the lower court’s order was issued in violation of her due process rights because the scope of the hearing and order went beyond the scope of matters for which she received notice. The hearing was scheduled as a “status conference,” addressing specifically the issue of Father’s telephonic communication with the child. The court’s order went beyond simply addressing that issue and, instead, modified the timesharing and communication requirements set forth in the final judgment of paternity. The order changed the primary residential custody of the child without providing Mother prior notice that such a result might occur. This was error. [. . .] Notably, neither Father nor the parenting coordinator had filed any paper asking the lower court to alter the parenting plan. Father does not contest Mother’s arguments in this Court. Modification of the final judgment was not before the court by a properly noticed pleading, and, therefore, the trial court’s order must be reversed.”

Schedule your meeting with a Miami family law attorney to discuss your case and receive specific advice.