In Magdiziak v. Sullivan, the Fifth District Court of Appeals for the State of Florida reversed a trial court decision because the parenting plan lacked the required specificity.
The Court quoted Florida Statute Section 61.13(2)(b) which follows and stated that the trial courts parenting plan was too general stating “For example, simply awarding the mother every other weekend do es not specify when the weekend starts and stops, and the history of this case casts doubt on the parties’ ability to work out the details for themselves. Other time-sharing provisions also lack specificity. It is in the best interests of the child, the parties, and the court to include such specifics to minimize future litigation.” A parenting plan needs to be specific as to time-sharing (custody, visitation and exchange times) to comply with the law and be upheld on appeal.
