Steven Hewell v. Joudelene Hewell
This text of Steven Hewell v. Joudelene Hewell (Steven Hewell v. Joudelene Hewell) 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
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed August 27, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D24-1501 Lower Tribunal No. 22-23437-FC-04 ________________
Steven Hewell, Appellant,
vs.
Joudelene Hewell, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Spencer Multack, Judge.
Law Office of David Scott, P.A., and David Scott (Fort Lauderdale), for appellant.
Joudelene Hewell, in proper person.
Before EMAS, FERNANDEZ and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM. Steven Hewell (the “Former Husband”), appeals a final judgment of
dissolution of marriage, contending that the trial court erred in unequally
distributing the marital debts, finding that there was an agreement by Former
Husband to pay them, and failing to value and equally distribute all of his
claimed marital debts. “We review an equitable distribution determination for
an abuse of discretion.” Michener v. Michener, 403 So. 3d 1040, 1042 (Fla.
3d DCA 2025) (citing Viscito v. Viscito, 214 So. 3d 736, 737 (Fla. 3d DCA
2017)). Following our review, we affirm the final judgment in all respects.
“We note, as a threshold matter, that Former Husband has not provided a
transcript of the proceedings in the lower court and therefore (absent a
supportable claim of fundamental error) Former Husband has failed to
provide an adequate record for meaningful review of those claims which we
would review for competent substantial evidence or under an abuse of
discretion standard.” Magana v. Machado, 406 So. 3d 317, 318 (Fla. 3d
DCA 2025). “In addition, and to the extent Former Husband claims the trial
court failed to make requisite factual findings in the final judgment, it has not
been properly preserved because Former Husband failed to file a motion for
rehearing in the trial court.” Id. (quoting Fla. Fam. L. R. P. 12.530(a) (“To
preserve for appeal a challenge to the failure of the trial court to make
required findings of fact in the final judgment, a party must raise that issue in
2 a motion for rehearing under this rule.”)).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Steven Hewell v. Joudelene Hewell, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steven-hewell-v-joudelene-hewell-fladistctapp-2025.