Kaptein v. Kaptein

221 So.3d 231 (2017)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

H and W's daughter, C.E.K., was born on February 25, 2013. On April 30, 2014, W filed a petition for divorce and requested sole custody of C.E.K. The trial court awarded W interim sole custody, while H was awarded interim supervised visitation with C.E.K. each month from the first Saturday until the second Sunday for a minimum time period of two (2) hours to a maximum of eight (8) hours each day, and FaceTime visits. H was also ordered to pay interim spousal support of $15,000 per month and child support of $5,000 per month. The court found as follows: H admitted to engaging in multiple extra-marital affairs, with not one, but multiple women in several different countries. He also admitted to paying the travel expenses for such women, so he could not only have sex with them but have unprotected sex with them. The judge found that H's testimony and admitted indiscretions demonstrate a reckless disregard for his personal safety, which calls into question the safety of the minor child. H does not have a stable home, he does not live or work in the United States, nor will he be in this country for an extended period of time. Almost immediately H failed to make the support payments. The court granted W's rule for contempt and found that as of the date of the hearing, Mr. Kaptein owed $78,000.00 in past due support and suspended H's rights to visitation through FaceTime pending further orders from the trial court. The trial court eventually granted W sole custody, maintained its previous order suspending H's FaceTime visitation, and held that 'reasonable visitation with H is not in the best interest of the child.' No evidence was presented to show that the child has strong ties to H. H has shown little interest in providing C.[E.]K. with love and guidance. He has not seen C.[E.]K. for over half of her life because he has resided in a different country. H is a successful businessman with the means to provide food and material needs for the child. H is under orders to pay support and has been held in contempt for his failure to follow those orders. Since the termination of the marriage, the evidence shows that H has continued making trips to various countries. H has a sexual obsession that adversely affects his ability and his fitness to raise C.[E.]K. H is more interested in traveling and engaging in lavish sex parties than he is in being a father. H has not visited with C.[E.]K. since September of 2015. H appealed contending in part that the trial court erred in awarding sole custody to W; the trial court erred in ruling that reasonable visitation with him is not in the best interest of C.E.K., and in continuing the suspension of FaceTime visitation with C.E.K.