Burns v. Carricarte

Supreme Court of Florida

Burns v. Carricarte

336 So. 2d 1171, 1976 Fla. LEXIS 4485

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedApril 14, 1976

DocketNo. 47922

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 336 So. 2d 1171 (Burns v. Carricarte) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burns v. Carricarte, 336 So. 2d 1171, 1976 Fla. LEXIS 4485 (Fla. 1976).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Certiorari was granted in this cause on apparent conflict between the instant decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, reported at 314 So.2d 820 (Fla.App.3d 1975), and McGuire v. McGuire, 140 So.2d 354 (Fla.App.2d 1962); In re Brown, 246 So.2d 166 (Fla.App.3d 1971); Keller v. Keller, 308 So.2d 106 (Fla.1974), and Hosking v. Hosking, 318 So.2d 559 (Fla.App.2d 1975).

The trial court rendered an extensive custody order subsequent to a marriage dissolution of the parties. The District Court affirmed per curiam without opinion. We issued the writ and have heard argument of the parties. After hearing argument, and upon further consideration of the cause, we find that the factual situation is unique and distinguishable from the cases cited for conflict and there is no reported opinion that requires harmonization with existing law. Accordingly, the writ heretofore issued is discharged.

OVERTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND and HATCH-ETT, JJ., concur. SUNDBERG, J., concurs with an opinion, with which ADKINS, BOYD and HATCHETT, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Certiorari was granted in this cause on apparent conflict between the instant decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, reported at 314 So.2d 820 (Fla.App.3d 1975), and McGuire v. McGuire, 140 So.2d 354 (Fla.App.2d 1962); In re Brown, 246 So.2d 166 (Fla.App.3d 1971); Keller v. Keller, 308 So.2d 106 (Fla.1974), and Hosking v. Hosking, 318 So.2d 559 (Fla.App.2d 1975).

The trial court rendered an extensive custody order subsequent to a marriage dissolution of the parties. The District Court affirmed per curiam without opinion. We issued the writ and have heard argument of the parties. After hearing argument, and upon further consideration of the cause, we find that the factual situation is unique and distinguishable from the cases cited for conflict and there is no reported opinion that requires harmonization with existing law. Accordingly, the writ heretofore issued is discharged.

OVERTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ADKINS, BOYD, ENGLAND and HATCH-ETT, JJ., concur. SUNDBERG, J., concurs with an opinion, with which ADKINS, BOYD and HATCHETT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

336 So. 2d 1171, 1976 Fla. LEXIS 4485, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burns-v-carricarte-fla-1976.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack