Epstein Secrets

We note that the Former Husband's petition did not seek an award of split cus- tody. In its order, the court noted that the Guardian, Jac- queline Valdespino, testified there was a substantial change in circumstances in accord with the Former Husband's position. However, the court explained that it did

ings conflicts with these functions, and violates the statutory prohibi- tion against Guardians acting as advocates. See§ 61.403 Fla. Stat. (1997); Scaringe v. Herrick, 711 So.2d at 204. Simply, the Guardian does not have a statutory right to appear in these proceedings. See Betz v. Betz, 254 Neb. 341, 575 N.W.2d

We note that the Former Husband's petition did not seek an award of split cus- tody. In its order, the court noted that the Guardian, Jac- queline Valdespino, testified there was a substantial change in circumstances in accord with the Former Husband's position. However, the court explained that it did

dings conflicts with these functions, and violates the statutory prohibi- tion against Guardians acting as advocates. See§ 1.403 Fla. Stat. (1997); Scaringe v. Herrick, 711 Eld at 204. Simply, the Guardian does not have a statutory right to appear in these proceedings. See Betz v. Betz, 254 Neb. 341, 575 N.W.2d 4

We note that the Former Husband's petition did not seek an award of split cus- tody. In its order, the court noted that the Guardian. Jac- queline Valdespino, testified there was a substantial change in circumstances in accord with the Former Husband's position. However, the court explained that it did

ings conflicts with these functions, and violates the statutory prohibi- tion against Guardians acting as advocates. See§ 61.403 Fla. Stat. (1997); Scaringe v. Herrick. 711 So.2d at 204. Simply, the Guardian does not have a statutory right to appear in these proceedings. See Betz v. Betz, 254 Neb. 341, 575 N.W.2d