MALEK v. MALEK (2025)

Appellant Andre Malek appeals a final judgment for paternity. He challenges the time-sharing portion of the order, which limited his visitation to every other weekend on Saturday from 10:00 am to 7:00 pm.

At the final hearing, the trial court heard testimony from four witnesses and received evidence. Thereafter, it issued an order addressing the factors set forth in section 61.13, Florida Statutes, and focused on the best interest of the minor child. Because the trial court's findings are supported by competent, substantial evidence, we are constrained to affirm. See Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13, 16 (Fla. 1976) (“It is not the function of the appellate court to substitute its judgment for that of the trial court through re-evaluation of the testimony and evidence from the record on appeal before it. The test ․ is whether the judgment of the trial court is supported by competent evidence.”); Florida Mining & Materials v. Mobley, 649 So. 2d 934, 934 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (“But the case may not be retried on appeal, and a ruling which is supported by competent substantial evidence will be upheld even though there may be some persuasive evidence to the contrary.”).

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.