discussed Cited as authority (rule) Loza v. Marin See, e.g., D.J.S. v. W.R.R., 99 So. 3d 991, 993 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (holding that trial court had jurisdiction to consider mother's supplemental petition seeking modification of child support filed when the child was "eighteen years old and in high school with a reasonable expectation of graduating before his nineteenth birthday"). - 11 - curiam); cf. Gamache v. Gamache, 14 So. 3d 1236, 1238 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (holding that a trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over child custody issues, where the adult dependent child was over eighteen years of age and had never been declared incapa…

discussed Cited as authority (rule) Loza v. Marin Roush, 169 So.3d 1286 , 1286 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (per curiam); cf. Gamache v. Gamache, 14 So.3d 1236, 1238 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (holding that a trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over child custody issues, where the adult dependent child was over eighteen years of age and had never been declared incapacitated or incompetent). 3 III.

discussed Cited "see" YVES MOQUIN v. SYLVIE BERGERON See Gamache v. Gamache, 14 So. 3d 1236, 1238 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (holding that in a marriage dissolution action, neither parent may take custody of a competent, legal adult).