Case Name: James RUMPH, Appellant, v. In the Interest of V.D., a child, etc., Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1996-02-14
Citations: 667 So. 2d 998
Docket Number: No. 94-1470
Parties: James RUMPH, Appellant, v. In the Interest of V.D., a child, etc., Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BASKIN and GERSTEN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 667
Pages: 998–1000

Head Matter:
James RUMPH, Appellant, v. In the Interest of V.D., a child, etc., Appellee.
No. 94-1470.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Feb. 14, 1996.
Gregory A. Samms and Sarnia P. Giddings, Certified Legal Intern, Miami, for appellant.
Greenberg, Traurig, Hoffman, Lipoff, Ro-sen & Quentel and Charles M. Auslander; Robin H. Greene; Rosemarie S. Roth, Miami, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BASKIN and GERSTEN, JJ.

Opinion:
BASKIN, Judge.
We affirm the order denying the maternal granduncle's motion for change in custody of the dependent child. The trial court based its ruling on competent substantial evidence, including the testimony of two experts who stated that a transfer would be harmful to the child. § 39.41(4)(b), Fla.Stat. (Supp. 1994). This is a temporary order, not a final disposition, and we hold that the court did not abuse its discretion.
Affirmed.
GERSTEN, J., concurs.