Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed April 20, 2022.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D21-0973
Lower Tribunal No. 19-27344
________________
Pamela Levy,
Appellant,
vs.
Shaun Donnenfeld,
Appellee.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Scott M.
Bernstein, Judge.
Twig, Trade, & Tribunal, PLLC, and Morgan L. Weinstein (Fort
Lauderdale), for appellant.
Kaplan Loebl LLC, and Amanda B. Haberman, and Liliana Loebl, for
appellee.
Before SCALES, MILLER, and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Pamela Levy, the mother, challenges a final judgment of
dissolution awarding appellee, Shaun Donnenfeld, the father,
disproportionate time-sharing and sole decision-making authority as to the
medical needs of the two minor children of the marriage. Because the trial
court alone has the authority to render credibility determinations, the record
supports the proposition the issue of medical decision-making authority was
tried by consent, and the decision below is supported by competent,
substantial evidence, we find no error in either determination. See Williams
v. Nuno,
239 So. 3d 153, 155 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (“[A] trial court’s factual
determinations, including credibility determinations, are ordinarily not
disturbed on appeal.”); Smith v. Smith,
971 So. 2d 191, 194–95 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2007) (“[A]lthough Former Husband did not initially seek shared
parental responsibility, we note that issues not raised by the pleadings
nevertheless can be tried by express or implied consent and, in such
instances, may be treated by the trial court as if they had been properly
pled.”); Schwieterman v. Schwieterman,
114 So. 3d 984, 987 (Fla. 5th DCA
2012) (“A trial court’s time-sharing plan must be affirmed if there is
competent substantial evidence to support that decision and reasonable
people could differ with respect to the trial court’s decision.”). Further finding
2
the mother has a myriad of alternative avenues to enforce the monetary
provisions of the final judgment, we affirm the remaining issues on appeal.
Affirmed.
3
