Carberry v. Carberry

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Carberry v. Carberry

830 So. 2d 246, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 16857, 2002 WL 31509846

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 13, 2002

DocketNo. 4D02-3221

StatusPublished

This text of 830 So. 2d 246 (Carberry v. Carberry) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carberry v. Carberry, 830 So. 2d 246, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 16857, 2002 WL 31509846 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We withdraw our order to show cause in this petition for writ of prohibition seeking to disqualify the trial judge from conducting further proceedings in this divorce and custody dispute. While the court may have erred by entertaining the guardian’s unsworn motion for change of custody, see section 61.403(6), Florida Statutes (2001) (requiring a guardian to act through counsel), this conduct does not rise to the level requiring disqualification. See generally [247]*247Harris v. P.S. Mortgage & Inv. Co., 558 So.2d 430, 431 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (“[T]he erroneous entry of a prior ex parte order by a trial judge, without more, presents no basis in itself for subsequently disqualifying the trial judge from conducting further proceedings in the case.”).

Petition denied.

WARNER, FARMER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We withdraw our order to show cause in this petition for writ of prohibition seeking to disqualify the trial judge from conducting further proceedings in this divorce and custody dispute. While the court may have erred by entertaining the guardian’s unsworn motion for change of custody, see section 61.403(6), Florida Statutes (2001) (requiring a guardian to act through counsel), this conduct does not rise to the level requiring disqualification. See generally [247]*247Harris v. P.S. Mortgage & Inv. Co., 558 So.2d 430, 431 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (“[T]he erroneous entry of a prior ex parte order by a trial judge, without more, presents no basis in itself for subsequently disqualifying the trial judge from conducting further proceedings in the case.”).

Petition denied.

WARNER, FARMER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

830 So. 2d 246, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 16857, 2002 WL 31509846, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carberry-v-carberry-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack