Gonzalez v. Hewitt
This text of Gonzalez v. Hewitt (Gonzalez v. Hewitt) 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.
Opinion
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
MARYSELY GONZALEZ,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D16-1346
GUILLERMO HEWITT,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed March 10, 2017
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lake County, Mark J. Hill, Judge.
Brandon M. Tyson, of Tyson Law Firm, LLC, Altamonte Springs, for Appellant.
No Appearance for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Marysely Gonzalez (“Mother”) appeals the default final judgment of paternity,
contending that the trial court erred in summarily denying her motion to set aside the
default judgment without an evidentiary hearing regarding her allegations of excusable
neglect. We agree. We therefore reverse the judgment and remand with instructions to
hold an evidentiary hearing on Mother’s motion to vacate. We also note that the trial court
erred in failing to make appropriate findings regarding the best interest of the child pursuant to section 61.13(3), Florida Statutes (2016), and by failing to include an
explanation of the method by which Mother can establish timesharing with the child.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
SAWAYA and BERGER, JJ., and JACOBUS, B.W., Senior Judge, concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Gonzalez v. Hewitt, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gonzalez-v-hewitt-fladistctapp-2017.