GRUNZKE v. Mason
18 So. 3d 652, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 12858, 2009 WL 2777158
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 1, 2009·No. 1D09-1422·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
AFFIRMED. See Plichta v. Plichta, 899 So.2d 1283, 1285-86 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (holding that Perlow v. Berg-Perlow, 875 So.2d 383 (Fla.2004), does not require a trial court to afford a litigant the opportunity to object to a proposed order prior to the court’s adoption of it if the proposed order merely memorializes rulings the trial court has already made).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
GRUNZKE v. Mason, 18 So. 3d 652, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 12858, 2009 WL 2777158 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).
18 So. 3d 652 (GRUNZKE v. Mason) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Justice Administrative Commission v. Taylor
50 So. 3d 753 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)