Conway v. Wallin
The trial court conditioned a father's temporary time-sharing with his three children 'only to the extent that the eldest child is willing to participate,' and required all three children to attend together. The Third District reversed, holding that section 61.13(2)(c) vests time-sharing determinations exclusively in the court and that conditioning time-sharing on a child's willingness is an improper delegation of nondelegable judicial authority, compounded where one child's veto also defeated the younger siblings' contact.
Key facts
- Father appealed a trial court order conditioning his temporary time-sharing with three children only to the extent the eldest child was willing to participate, with all three children required to attend together.
- The trial court's order made the eldest child's willingness, rather than the court, the decisionmaker on whether time-sharing would occur, and required all siblings to participate as a unit.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
Family practitioners get a citable Third DCA statement that any 'if the child is willing' condition in a temporary time-sharing order is a reversible delegation of nondelegable judicial authority, extending Hershberger… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.