Mercer v. Mercer

96 So. 3d 1094, 2012 WL 3822263, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 14866
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedSeptember 5, 2012
DocketNo. 4D11-1656
StatusPublished

This text of 96 So. 3d 1094 (Mercer v. Mercer) 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
Mercer v. Mercer, 96 So. 3d 1094, 2012 WL 3822263, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 14866 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Ries v. Ries, 984 So.2d 612, 613 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). As to appellant’s claim that the court adopted the wife’s final judgment without providing him with service of the proposed final judgment, appellant’s pleadings were stricken for failure to provide discovery, and he was sanctioned and excluded from the courtroom for obstructive behavior. We conclude that Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.080(c) applies. That rule provides that “[n]o service need be made on parties against whom a default has been entered.... ”

WARNER, DAMOORGIAN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Ries v. Ries
984 So. 2d 612 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
96 So. 3d 1094, 2012 WL 3822263, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 14866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mercer-v-mercer-fladistctapp-2012.