Champion v. Champion

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Champion v. Champion

98 So. 3d 1289, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 18717, 2012 WL 5275472

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 26, 2012

DocketNo. 1D11-5457

StatusPublished

This text of 98 So. 3d 1289 (Champion v. Champion) 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

Champion v. Champion, 98 So. 3d 1289, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 18717, 2012 WL 5275472 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a post-dissolution Order on Petitioner’s Motion for Enforcement and Request for Sanctions. In the order, the trial court “approved, affirmed, and adopted as an Order of this court,” the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendations, and found appellant’s exceptions to the report, filed in accordance with Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.490(f), “not sufficient to require hearing.” Chief among appellant’s exceptions was the trial court’s failure to adhere to the mandate in rule 12.490(b)(1), that “[n]o matter shall be heard by a general magistrate without an appropriate order of reference and the consent to the referral of all parties.” Having ascertained that no such order of reference exists of record in this case, we are compelled to reverse the order on appeal and remand for further proceedings consistent with rule 12.490. See Hand v. Kushmer, 695 So.2d 858 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

ROBERTS, WETHERELL, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a post-dissolution Order on Petitioner’s Motion for Enforcement and Request for Sanctions. In the order, the trial court “approved, affirmed, and adopted as an Order of this court,” the Magistrate’s Report and Recommendations, and found appellant’s exceptions to the report, filed in accordance with Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.490(f), “not sufficient to require hearing.” Chief among appellant’s exceptions was the trial court’s failure to adhere to the mandate in rule 12.490(b)(1), that “[n]o matter shall be heard by a general magistrate without an appropriate order of reference and the consent to the referral of all parties.” Having ascertained that no such order of reference exists of record in this case, we are compelled to reverse the order on appeal and remand for further proceedings consistent with rule 12.490. See Hand v. Kushmer, 695 So.2d 858 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

ROBERTS, WETHERELL, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

98 So. 3d 1289, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 18717, 2012 WL 5275472, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/champion-v-champion-fladistctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack