Middleton v. Middleton

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Middleton v. Middleton

623 So. 2d 851, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 9220, 1993 WL 347509

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 10, 1993

DocketNo. 93-367

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 623 So. 2d 851 (Middleton v. Middleton) 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

Middleton v. Middleton, 623 So. 2d 851, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 9220, 1993 WL 347509 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is the second time that this dissolution of marriage action has been before us. On the first occasion, we reversed the trial court’s determination that appellant was not the father of a child born to appellee during the parties’ marriage, and remanded for further proceedings on the issue of paternity. Middleton v. Middleton, 603 So.2d 618 (Fla. 1st DCA1992). On remand, the trial court postponed determination of the paternity issue until appellant’s release from incarceration. (Appellant has a 20-year state sentence and a 15-year federal sentence to serve.) We again reverse. On remand, the trial court is directed to grant what it has previously treated as a motion by appellant requesting Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) testing. See § 742.12, Fla.Stat. (1989). The trial court shall then conduct such further proceedings as may be necessary to determine whether appellant is the father of the child in question.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

MINER, ALLEN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is the second time that this dissolution of marriage action has been before us. On the first occasion, we reversed the trial court’s determination that appellant was not the father of a child born to appellee during the parties’ marriage, and remanded for further proceedings on the issue of paternity. Middleton v. Middleton, 603 So.2d 618 (Fla. 1st DCA1992). On remand, the trial court postponed determination of the paternity issue until appellant’s release from incarceration. (Appellant has a 20-year state sentence and a 15-year federal sentence to serve.) We again reverse. On remand, the trial court is directed to grant what it has previously treated as a motion by appellant requesting Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) testing. See § 742.12, Fla.Stat. (1989). The trial court shall then conduct such further proceedings as may be necessary to determine whether appellant is the father of the child in question.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

MINER, ALLEN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

623 So. 2d 851, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 9220, 1993 WL 347509, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/middleton-v-middleton-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack