Laura Pescod v. Christopher Irvin
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledNovember 17, 2021
Docket2D21-0188
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
LAURA L. PESCOD,
Appellant,
v.
CHRISTOPHER G. IRVIN,
Appellee.
No. 2D21-188
November 17, 2021
Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.130 from the Circuit Court for
Pinellas County; Jack St. Arnold, Judge.
Laura L. Pescod, pro se.
Tyrone Zdravko of Reeser & Zdravko, LLC, Palm Harbor, for
Appellee.
BLACK, Judge.
Laura L. Pescod challenges the trial court's order granting
Christopher G. Irvin's "Verified Emergency Motion to Adopt the
Interim Recommendations of the Guardian Ad Litem." The court
granted Mr. Irvin's motion on an ex parte basis, finding that it was
in the best interest of the parties' minor child to implement the
recommendations of the guardian ad litem. We reverse.
The order on appeal was entered in December 2020 without a
hearing. It required Ms. Pescod and the parties' child to participate
in reunification therapy and implemented a three-month "time out"
during which time Ms. Pescod did not have timesharing with the
child overnight or at Ms. Pescod's home. Although the motion upon
which the order was predicated was sworn to by Mr. Irvin, Mr. Irvin
did not allege an emergency situation as required for entry of an ex
parte order and his only support was the unsworn report of the
guardian ad litem. See Bahl v. Bahl, 220 So. 3d 1214, 1216 (Fla.
2d DCA 2016). Accordingly, the trial court reversibly erred in
granting the motion without first holding an evidentiary hearing.
See id. The December 2020 order must be vacated on remand.1
1 Despite the fact that no relief can be afforded to Ms. Pescod
because the order is no longer in effect, we conclude that under the
circumstances of this case the appeal is not moot and that the
order must be vacated so that it may not be utilized in future
timesharing proceedings. Cf. Cancellari v. Rance, 779 So. 2d 373,
374 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Julian v. Bryan, 710 So. 2d 1037, 1039
(Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Troike v. Troike, 271 So. 3d 1069, 1072 (Fla. 3d
DCA 2019).
2
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
LUCAS and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
3