Briana Couture v. Austin Couture
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledApril 1, 2021
Docket1D20-2722
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
No. 1D20-2722
_____________________________
BRIANA COUTURE,
Appellant,
v.
AUSTIN COUTURE,
Appellee.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Suwannee County.
Mark E. Feagle, Judge.
April 1, 2021
PER CURIAM.
Briana Couture challenges an amended supplemental final
judgment of dissolution of marriage awarding Austin Couture
majority timesharing with the parties’ minor child. We reverse.
In the amended supplemental final judgment, the trial court
found that it was in the best interest of the child for Austin
Couture to have majority timesharing based on the timesharing
factors set forth in section 61.13, Florida Statutes. The court
ordered the parties to abide by a parenting plan, which was
attached as an exhibit to the final order. But the parenting plan
provides that Briana Couture will have all timesharing not
otherwise specified and that Austin Couture will have timesharing
every other weekend from Friday to Sunday. In addition, the
court’s findings on the timesharing factors support a conclusion
that the best interest evaluation favored Briana Couture’s case for
majority timesharing. Because the amended final judgment is
internally inconsistent on the award of timesharing, we reverse.
See Justice v. Justice, 80 So. 3d 405, 406 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
(finding that the trial court erred in ordering a timesharing
schedule in the final judgment that conflicted with the timesharing
schedule attached as an exhibit to the final judgment). In view of
our decision to reverse the order regarding timesharing, we decline
to reach Briana Couture’s other arguments specifically addressing
the trial court’s findings on two of the § 61.13(3) factors.
REVERSED and REMANDED for entry of a revised order
regarding timesharing.
ROWE, MAKAR, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.
_____________________________
Emily R. Calvin of Three Rivers Legal Services, Inc., Lake City;
Natalie N. Maxwell of Three Rivers Legal Services, Inc.,
Gainesville, for Appellant.
Lucas J. Taylor of Sellers, Taylor & Morrison, P.A., Live Oak, for
Appellee.
2