Watson v. Inman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Watson v. Inman

596 So. 2d 1282, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 4934, 1992 WL 84151

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 28, 1992·No. No. 91-2134·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellants complain that relief from execution, in the form of a stay on an ore tenus motion, was granted the appellee without compliance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.550(b). The record is devoid of the required motion for stay, notice of hearing and order granting a stay based on evidence and applicable substantive law. See Valdosta Milling Co. v. Garretson, 54 So.2d 196 (Fla.1951); H. Trawick, Florida Practice and Procedure, Relief from Executions § 27-2 (1991 ed.).

For the reasons stated, the stay is vacated and the cause is remanded for further consistent proceedings.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellants complain that relief from execution, in the form of a stay on an ore tenus motion, was granted the appellee without compliance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.550(b). The record is devoid of the required motion for stay, notice of hearing and order granting a stay based on evidence and applicable substantive law. See Valdosta Milling Co. v. Garretson, 54 So.2d 196 (Fla.1951); H. Trawick, Florida Practice and Procedure, Relief from Executions § 27-2 (1991 ed.).

For the reasons stated, the stay is vacated and the cause is remanded for further consistent proceedings.

Watson v. Inman, 596 So. 2d 1282, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 4934, 1992 WL 84151 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

596 So. 2d 1282 (Watson v. Inman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related