Delehant v. Delehant

409 So. 2d 213, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19102
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 3, 1982·No. No. 80-1872·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is the second time this court has been asked to review an award of the marital house of the parties to the wife as lump [214]*214sum alimony.1 Again, we find facial error in the trial court’s order of July 28, 1980, finalized by the subsequent final judgment, both of which were entered by the successor trial judge.

In order to comply with our earlier opinion, the original trial judge should have completed the matter or the successor trial judge should have conducted a trial de novo on the issues except dissolution and child custody.2 Neither was done.

Accordingly, we reverse the order and final judgment and remand to the trial court for proceedings consistent herewith.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

GLICKSTEIN and HURLEY, JJ., and GREEN, OLIVER L., Associate Judge, concur.

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

Delehant v. Delehant, 409 So. 2d 213, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19102 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

409 So. 2d 213 (Delehant v. Delehant) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. Brown
453 So. 2d 149 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Delehant v. Delehant
442 So. 2d 1009 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
Euart v. Fernsell
436 So. 2d 422 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)