Andy v.Lessem

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Andy v.Lessem

536 So. 2d 343, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 155, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 5656, 1988 WL 137185

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 21, 1988·No. No. 87-2049·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

FRANK, Judge.

The order under review, which derived from the motion of the personal representative of the estate of the putative biological father, to set aside an order vacating the adoption of the appellee, is affirmed. The appellant was not an essential party to the adoption proceeding when it occurred and has no standing now to challenge any aspect or the outcome of that matter. See §§ 63.122 and 63.162, Fla.Stat. (1987). Our affirmance, however, is without prejudice to the appellant’s ability to initiate an independent action. See In re Estate of Farley, 520 So.2d 619 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988).

DANAHY, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

FRANK, Judge.

The order under review, which derived from the motion of the personal representative of the estate of the putative biological father, to set aside an order vacating the adoption of the appellee, is affirmed. The appellant was not an essential party to the adoption proceeding when it occurred and has no standing now to challenge any aspect or the outcome of that matter. See §§ 63.122 and 63.162, Fla.Stat. (1987). Our affirmance, however, is without prejudice to the appellant’s ability to initiate an independent action. See In re Estate of Farley, 520 So.2d 619 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988).

DANAHY, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.

Andy v.Lessem, 536 So. 2d 343, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 155, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 5656, 1988 WL 137185 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

536 So. 2d 343 (Andy v.Lessem) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related