Charry v. Torres

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Charry v. Torres

263 So. 3d 238

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 23, 2019

DocketNo. 3D18-1014

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 263 So. 3d 238 (Charry v. Torres) 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

Charry v. Torres, 263 So. 3d 238 (Fla. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

LOGUE, J.

Appellant seeks review of the trial court's order denying her motion to intervene following a hearing. We review the denial of the motion to intervene for an abuse of discretion. See Abujasen v. Dreke, 118 So.3d 235, 235 n.1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (citing Barnhill v. Fla. Microsoft Anti-Trust Litig., 905 So.2d 195, 199 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) ("The standard of review of an order on a motion to intervene is abuse of discretion.") ). Although a hearing was held on Appellant's motion, there is no transcript of the hearing. Under the circumstances of this case, in the absence of a transcript, we cannot reasonably conclude that the trial court abused its discretion, and therefore, we affirm. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) ; Shojaie v. Gables Court Prof'l Ctr., Inc., 974 So.2d 1140, 1141-42 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008).

Affirmed.

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

LOGUE, J.

Appellant seeks review of the trial court's order denying her motion to intervene following a hearing. We review the denial of the motion to intervene for an abuse of discretion. See Abujasen v. Dreke, 118 So.3d 235, 235 n.1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (citing Barnhill v. Fla. Microsoft Anti-Trust Litig., 905 So.2d 195, 199 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) ("The standard of review of an order on a motion to intervene is abuse of discretion.") ). Although a hearing was held on Appellant's motion, there is no transcript of the hearing. Under the circumstances of this case, in the absence of a transcript, we cannot reasonably conclude that the trial court abused its discretion, and therefore, we affirm. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) ; Shojaie v. Gables Court Prof'l Ctr., Inc., 974 So.2d 1140, 1141-42 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 So. 3d 238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/charry-v-torres-fladistctapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack