Huguet v. Colon

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Huguet v. Colon

630 So. 2d 1138, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 10301, 1993 WL 406620

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 12, 1993

DocketNo. 93-374

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 630 So. 2d 1138 (Huguet v. Colon) 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

Huguet v. Colon, 630 So. 2d 1138, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 10301, 1993 WL 406620 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Based upon the appellee’s forthright and correct confession that the trial court committed reversible error in failing to hold a hearing on the parties’ objections to the Special Master’s Report, the final judgment entered herein is reversed and this cause is remanded with directions to the trial court to hold a hearing at which time the above-described objections can be construed by the trial court. At the said hearing, the objecting party will have the burden of complying with all applicable case law of the State of Florida in seeking to have their objections sustained. If, in seeking to have the objection sustained, the objecting party goes beyond the face of the Special Master’s “Report and Recommendations”, then the proceeding shall be governed by Petrakis v. Petrakis, 597 So.2d 856 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). See also Rule 1.490(f) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

Reversed and remanded, with directions.

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

PER CURIAM.

Based upon the appellee’s forthright and correct confession that the trial court committed reversible error in failing to hold a hearing on the parties’ objections to the Special Master’s Report, the final judgment entered herein is reversed and this cause is remanded with directions to the trial court to hold a hearing at which time the above-described objections can be construed by the trial court. At the said hearing, the objecting party will have the burden of complying with all applicable case law of the State of Florida in seeking to have their objections sustained. If, in seeking to have the objection sustained, the objecting party goes beyond the face of the Special Master’s “Report and Recommendations”, then the proceeding shall be governed by Petrakis v. Petrakis, 597 So.2d 856 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). See also Rule 1.490(f) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

Reversed and remanded, with directions.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

630 So. 2d 1138, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 10301, 1993 WL 406620, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/huguet-v-colon-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack