Stock v. Stock

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Stock v. Stock

410 So. 2d 659, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19417

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 9, 1982

DocketNo. 81-1052

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 410 So. 2d 659 (Stock v. Stock) 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

Stock v. Stock, 410 So. 2d 659, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19417 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was served by constructive service of process by publication in a marriage dissolution proceeding. She filed certain defensive motions, including a motion [660]*660for extension of time to respond to the original petition. All motions were denied, except she was granted 30 additional days to respond. She failed to file a response or answer or secure another extension in the additional thirty-day period. A default was duly entered, followed by final judgment of dissolution that only dissolved the marriage and fixed no property rights or alimony, etc.

We find no error and affirm. Gelkop v. Gelkop, 384 So.2d 195 (Fla.3d DCA 1980); Stevenson v. Arnold, 250 So.2d 270 (Fla.1971).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was served by constructive service of process by publication in a marriage dissolution proceeding. She filed certain defensive motions, including a motion [660]*660for extension of time to respond to the original petition. All motions were denied, except she was granted 30 additional days to respond. She failed to file a response or answer or secure another extension in the additional thirty-day period. A default was duly entered, followed by final judgment of dissolution that only dissolved the marriage and fixed no property rights or alimony, etc.

We find no error and affirm. Gelkop v. Gelkop, 384 So.2d 195 (Fla.3d DCA 1980); Stevenson v. Arnold, 250 So.2d 270 (Fla.1971).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

410 So. 2d 659, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stock-v-stock-fladistctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack