McQuade v. Holroyd
This text of McQuade v. Holroyd (McQuade v. Holroyd) 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
DANA LYNN MCQUADE,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D16-3009
LANDON BRUCE HOLROYD,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed February 3, 2017
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Heather Pinder Rodriguez, Judge.
Jennifer A. Englert, of The Orlando Law Group, P.L., Orlando, for Appellant.
Hal Roen, of Hal Roen, P.A., Maitland, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Because we do not have a transcript of the proceedings below, we cannot resolve
the underlying factual issues in order to determine whether the trial court's judgment on
the issue of child support is without evidentiary support. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank
of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979). In the absence of a transcript, we will
only reverse where the error appears on the face of the judgment. See Monacelli v. Gonzalez, 883 So. 2d 361, 362 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Hoirup v. Hoirup, 862 So. 2d 780,
782 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Appellant has made no such showing in this case.
AFFIRMED.
COHEN, C.J., PALMER and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
McQuade v. Holroyd, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcquade-v-holroyd-fladistctapp-2017.