Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Urbanek v. Hopkins

Urbanek v. Hopkins

65 So. 3d 645, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 11769, 2011 WL 3111849
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 27, 2011
DocketNo. 4D11-1574
StatusPublished

This text of 65 So. 3d 645 (Urbanek v. Hopkins) 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
Urbanek v. Hopkins, 65 So. 3d 645, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 11769, 2011 WL 3111849 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

August Urbanek seeks review of an order appointing a special master to oversee disputed discovery. We grant the petition. Pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490(c) the trial court may not refer a matter to a magistrate, either general or special, without the consent of all of the parties. Washington Park Props., LLC v. Estrada, 996 So.2d 892 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); Gielchinsky v. Vibo Corp., 5 So.3d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). We grant the petition and direct the trial court to vacate its order of referral to the special master.

Petition granted, order quashed.

POLEN, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Gielchinsky v. VIBO CORP.
5 So. 3d 785 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2009)
WASHINGTON PARK PROPERTIES, LLC v. Estrada
996 So. 2d 892 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
65 So. 3d 645, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 11769, 2011 WL 3111849, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/urbanek-v-hopkins-fladistctapp-2011.