Solernou v. Solernou

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Solernou v. Solernou

455 So. 2d 1162, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2076, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15159

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 25, 1984

DocketNo. 84-634

StatusPublished

This text of 455 So. 2d 1162 (Solernou v. Solernou) 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

Solernou v. Solernou, 455 So. 2d 1162, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2076, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15159 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The ruling of the trial court is reversed upon a finding that there is no competent, substantial evidence on the record to support its action in this case. Kuvin v. Kuvin, 442 So.2d 203 (Fla.1983); Conner v. Conner, 439 So.2d 887 (Fla.1983); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So.2d 13 (Fla.1976); Schein v. Schein, 448 So.2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).

Reversed.

DANIEL S. PEARSON, Judge, concurring.

I, too, would reverse this final judgment of dissolution of marriage. I would, however, make clear that we are remanding the case for a new final hearing. It appears that the trial court’s displeasure with the wife’s numerous pre-trial changes of counsel caused it to overlook that the wife, despite the trial court’s continued insistence that she obtain counsel, was proceeding without counsel. Of course, the wife was entitled to represent herself and participate in the proceedings, and her silence at the final hearing is hardly an acquiescence in or stipulation to the husband’s evidence.

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

PER CURIAM.

The ruling of the trial court is reversed upon a finding that there is no competent, substantial evidence on the record to support its action in this case. Kuvin v. Kuvin, 442 So.2d 203 (Fla.1983); Conner v. Conner, 439 So.2d 887 (Fla.1983); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So.2d 13 (Fla.1976); Schein v. Schein, 448 So.2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).

Reversed.

DANIEL S. PEARSON, Judge, concurring.

I, too, would reverse this final judgment of dissolution of marriage. I would, however, make clear that we are remanding the case for a new final hearing. It appears that the trial court’s displeasure with the wife’s numerous pre-trial changes of counsel caused it to overlook that the wife, despite the trial court’s continued insistence that she obtain counsel, was proceeding without counsel. Of course, the wife was entitled to represent herself and participate in the proceedings, and her silence at the final hearing is hardly an acquiescence in or stipulation to the husband’s evidence.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

455 So. 2d 1162, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2076, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15159, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/solernou-v-solernou-fladistctapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack