O'Connor v. O'Connor

District Court of Appeal of Florida

O'Connor v. O'Connor

184 So. 3d 1149, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 16139, 2015 WL 6613552

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 30, 2015

Docket2D14-3690

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 184 So. 3d 1149 (O'Connor v. O'Connor) 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

O'Connor v. O'Connor, 184 So. 3d 1149, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 16139, 2015 WL 6613552 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Zulema O’Connor appeals from the final judgment dissolving her marriage to Thomas O’Connor. She challenges various aspects of the final judgment that pertain to the marital home, equitable distribution, time-sharing, child support, and alimony. There- is no transcript of the final hearing in the record, but the record contains “FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FROM MAY 14, 2014, TRIAL.”

In the absence of a transcript, the trial court’s factual findings are presumed correct, and our review is limited to errors apparent on the face of the judgment. See Mobley v. Mobley, 18 So.3d 724, 725 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (holding that in the absence of a hearing transcript, an appellate court is limited to correcting errors of law apparent on the face of the judgment). Because we find no error in the trial court’s rulings, we affirm. However, the parties acknowledge that a discrepancy exists between paragraphs nine and twenty-five of the final judgment concerning the child support award. Therefore, we remand to the trial court for correction of the apparent scrivener’s error by amended final judgment. See Mitchell v. Mitchell, 841 So.2d 564, 568 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).

Affirmed; remanded for correction of judgment.

KELLY, MORRIS, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Zulema O’Connor appeals from the final judgment dissolving her marriage to Thomas O’Connor. She challenges various aspects of the final judgment that pertain to the marital home, equitable distribution, time-sharing, child support, and alimony. There- is no transcript of the final hearing in the record, but the record contains “FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FROM MAY 14, 2014, TRIAL.”

In the absence of a transcript, the trial court’s factual findings are presumed correct, and our review is limited to errors apparent on the face of the judgment. See Mobley v. Mobley, 18 So.3d 724, 725 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (holding that in the absence of a hearing transcript, an appellate court is limited to correcting errors of law apparent on the face of the judgment). Because we find no error in the trial court’s rulings, we affirm. However, the parties acknowledge that a discrepancy exists between paragraphs nine and twenty-five of the final judgment concerning the child support award. Therefore, we remand to the trial court for correction of the apparent scrivener’s error by amended final judgment. See Mitchell v. Mitchell, 841 So.2d 564, 568 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).

Affirmed; remanded for correction of judgment.

KELLY, MORRIS, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

184 So. 3d 1149, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 16139, 2015 WL 6613552, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oconnor-v-oconnor-fladistctapp-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack