Daniel v. Department of Revenue

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Daniel v. Department of Revenue

768 So. 2d 541, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13298, 2000 WL 1513728

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 13, 2000

DocketNo. 5D00-280

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 768 So. 2d 541 (Daniel v. Department of Revenue) 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

Daniel v. Department of Revenue, 768 So. 2d 541, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13298, 2000 WL 1513728 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellee candidly concedes that appellant’s motion to vacate the hearing officer’s report was timely filed. In a proceeding filed by the Department of Revenue to determine appellant’s arrearages, pursuant to Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.491, the trial court signed an order on September 3, 1999 approving the hearing officer’s report and recommendation. However, the order was not filed, thus rendered, until September 9, 1999. Rule 12.491(f) allows any party affected by the order to move to vacate the order by motion filed within ten days from its entry. Appellant’s motion was filed September 21, 1999. Although the tenth day after rendition of the order was September 20, that day was a court holiday, so the motion filed the next day was timely. In denying appellant’s motion to vacate, the trial court erroneously recited that the order approving the hearing officer’s report was rendered on September 3, which if correct, would have made the motion to vacate untimely.

REVERSED for a hearing on the mer- • its.

W. SHARP, and HARRIS, JJ., and ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellee candidly concedes that appellant’s motion to vacate the hearing officer’s report was timely filed. In a proceeding filed by the Department of Revenue to determine appellant’s arrearages, pursuant to Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.491, the trial court signed an order on September 3, 1999 approving the hearing officer’s report and recommendation. However, the order was not filed, thus rendered, until September 9, 1999. Rule 12.491(f) allows any party affected by the order to move to vacate the order by motion filed within ten days from its entry. Appellant’s motion was filed September 21, 1999. Although the tenth day after rendition of the order was September 20, that day was a court holiday, so the motion filed the next day was timely. In denying appellant’s motion to vacate, the trial court erroneously recited that the order approving the hearing officer’s report was rendered on September 3, which if correct, would have made the motion to vacate untimely.

REVERSED for a hearing on the mer- • its.

W. SHARP, and HARRIS, JJ., and ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

768 So. 2d 541, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13298, 2000 WL 1513728, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniel-v-department-of-revenue-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack