JOHNSON v. JOHNSON (2024)

Appellant, the wife in a pending divorce action, appeals from a temporary relief order. We find merit in her argument that the trial court erred in awarding the husband “ultimate decision-making” while at the same time ordering shared parental responsibility. Clarke v. Stofft, 263 So. 3d 84 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019); Seligsohn v. Seligsohn, 259 So. 3d 874 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018); McClure v. Beck, 212 So. 3d 396 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017); see also Glevis v. Glevis, 310 So. 3d 525 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021). By awarding the husband ultimate decision-making authority on issues affecting the child, the trial court essentially nullified the award of shared parental responsibility. McClure, 212 So. 3d at 398; Glevis, 310 So. 3d at 528.

We reverse that portion of the temporary order for three reasons. First, the husband did not seek ultimate decision-making authority over any issues affecting the child's welfare. Second, the record does not include evidence to support that award. Third, the order fails to specify matters over which the husband would have ultimate decision-making authority. Louis v. Louis, 324 So. 3d 11, 12 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).

Without further discussion, we affirm the remaining portions of the order.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Per Curiam.

Levine, Forst and Kuntz, JJ., concur.