Heilman v. Heilman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Heilman v. Heilman

583 So. 2d 442, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 8308, 1991 WL 152516

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 14, 1991·No. No. 91-1508·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Consistent with our opinion in Oliveri v. Oliveri, 541 So.2d 174 (Fla.4th DCA 1989), we affirm the order of the trial court. However, we certify the following question of great public importance to the Florida Supreme Court:

IS THE CONSENT OF BOTH PARTIES REQUIRED BEFORE A CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ISSUE MAY BE REFERRED TO A HEARING OFFICER UNDER RULE 1.491, FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE?

ANSTEAD, LETTS and DELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Consistent with our opinion in Oliveri v. Oliveri, 541 So.2d 174 (Fla.4th DCA 1989), we affirm the order of the trial court. However, we certify the following question of great public importance to the Florida Supreme Court:

IS THE CONSENT OF BOTH PARTIES REQUIRED BEFORE A CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT ISSUE MAY BE REFERRED TO A HEARING OFFICER UNDER RULE 1.491, FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE?

ANSTEAD, LETTS and DELL, JJ., concur.

Heilman v. Heilman, 583 So. 2d 442, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 8308, 1991 WL 152516 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

583 So. 2d 442 (Heilman v. Heilman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related