Martowski v. Department of Revenue Ex Rel. Wyatt

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Martowski v. Department of Revenue Ex Rel. Wyatt

10 So. 3d 714, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 7767, 2009 WL 1676038

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 17, 2009

Docket2D07-4458

StatusPublished

This text of 10 So. 3d 714 (Martowski v. Department of Revenue Ex Rel. Wyatt) 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

Martowski v. Department of Revenue Ex Rel. Wyatt, 10 So. 3d 714, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 7767, 2009 WL 1676038 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

KELLY, Judge.

Michael Martowski appeals from the default judgment which legally establishes him as the father of K.W. He argues that he did not receive notice of trial and requests that the default be vacated so that the matter can proceed on the merits. The Department of Revenue (DOR) does not agree that Martowski lacked sufficient notice of the proceedings. However, DOR concedes and we agree, that the case should be remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the merits because there is no evidence to support the trial court’s findings in the final judgment. See Locklear v. Sampson, 478 So.2d 1113 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (holding that a judgment establishing paternity must not be entered solely upon the basis of unadmitted and unproven allegations of paternity, but must be based upon competent, substantial evidence). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing.

Reversed and remanded.

FULMER and LaROSE, JJ„ Concur.

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

KELLY, Judge.

Michael Martowski appeals from the default judgment which legally establishes him as the father of K.W. He argues that he did not receive notice of trial and requests that the default be vacated so that the matter can proceed on the merits. The Department of Revenue (DOR) does not agree that Martowski lacked sufficient notice of the proceedings. However, DOR concedes and we agree, that the case should be remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the merits because there is no evidence to support the trial court’s findings in the final judgment. See Locklear v. Sampson, 478 So.2d 1113 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (holding that a judgment establishing paternity must not be entered solely upon the basis of unadmitted and unproven allegations of paternity, but must be based upon competent, substantial evidence). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing.

Reversed and remanded.

FULMER and LaROSE, JJ„ Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 So. 3d 714, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 7767, 2009 WL 1676038, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martowski-v-department-of-revenue-ex-rel-wyatt-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack