Opinion
No. 2D12–6468.
11-14-2014
Kevin W. RICHARDSON, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Tara L. RICHARDSON, Appellee/Respondent(s).
Opinion
BY ORDER OF THE COURT.
The parties in this appeal were divorced in 2010 when a final judgment of dissolution was entered incorporating their marital settlement agreement. In July 2011, Kevin W. Richardson (the Father) filed a “Supplemental Petition for Modification of Custody” in which he requested that the court award him the majority of timesharing and modify the timesharing of Tara L. Richardson (the Mother) to include limited supervised visits. While the Father's Supplemental Petition for Modification was pending, the trial court entered an order that temporarily modified the timesharing provision in a manner that did not satisfy the Father. In December 2012, the Father filed this appeal seeking review of this interlocutory order.
At that time, the Father's Supplemental Petition for Modification was scheduled for final hearing in January 2013. The hearing was continued, but when the Father filed his reply brief in March 2014, he asserted that it was underway. This court noted that a ruling on the Supplemental Petition for Modification would likely render this appeal moot and issued an order requesting a status update. The Father filed a status update informing this court that the hearing on the Supplemental Petition for Modification had concluded on March 24, 2014. The Father asserted that the trial court had entered an order granting his Supplemental Petition for Modification but had not yet entered a modified final judgment of dissolution. The Father also informed this court that in May 2014, the trial court had entered two interlocutory orders granting him the majority of timesharing with the Mother having limited supervised visitation until the court formalized its ruling. The Father agreed that the order on appeal would be moot upon entry of a modified final judgment of dissolution and requested a stay of this appeal until that judgment was entered. Because a final judgment appeared likely to be entered at any moment, this court stayed the appeal.
For reasons that are unclear to this court, the modified final judgment still remains pending seven months after the hearing on the Supplemental Petition for Modification was concluded. The most recent filing by the Father indicates that the trial court conducted a “Final Disposition hearing” on October 28 and 30, 2014. In the meantime, we have reconsidered the mootness issue and, based on the Father's status reports, conclude that the Father received the relief he seeks on appeal upon the entry of the May 2014 orders temporarily granting him the majority of timesharing with the Mother having limited supervised visitation. While the May 2014 orders will eventually be supplanted by the entry of the modified final judgment, the Father will be entitled to appeal that modified final judgment if it is not satisfactory. Should the modified final judgment not be forthcoming, other remedies would be available to the Father. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed as moot.
NORTHCUTT, SILBERMAN, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.