OWEN LEWIS WYMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
CAROLE J. WYMAN, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A husband appealed a trial court order confirming a master's report that denied his request to setoff child support payments with expenses he incurred for his child's boarding school and work-related clothing. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded because the trial court failed to hold a hearing on the husband's exceptions to the master's report, as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490(h).
The trial court was required to hold a hearing on the husband's exceptions to the master's report when exceptions were filed. The failure to do so was reversible error, and the case must be remanded for the court to conduct the mandatory hearing.
[1] A party must properly preserve an objection to a reference to a master to preserve the issue for appeal.
[2] When exceptions are filed to a master's report, a hearing must be granted if requested by a party.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“If exceptions are filed, they shall be heard on reasonable notice by either party.”
This quote from Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490(h) establishes the mandatory requirement that a hearing must be held when exceptions to a master's report are filed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court had previously ordered the husband to pay temporary alimony and child support to the wife. After making payments for several months, t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse General Master'S Report cases and more on FLexlaw
DOWNEY, Judge.
Appellant husband seeks review of a non-final order of the trial court confirming the report of a general master requiring the husband to pay previously ordered child support to the wife without benefit of an alleged setoff.
The trial court had ordered the husband to pay temporary alimony and child support to the wife. After making the required payments for several months, the husband deducted from one monthly payment the amount he spent on outfitting one of the children for clothes needed for boarding school and for his work as a congressional page. The master held a hearing and filed a report recommending that the husband be required to make the ordered payment without any setoff. The husband timely filed exceptions to the master’s report, accompanied by a partial transcript of the hearing before the master. Without holding a hearing the trial court entered an order confirming the master’s report. A subsequent motion to vacate the order of confirmation was denied.
The husband presents several points on appeal, two of which we will consider. Firstly, the husband contends the reference to the master was erroneous. We reject that contention without even reaching the merits because it was not properly preserved. The husband made no appropriate objection to the reference at any time. Secondly, the husband is aggrieved by the order confirming the master’s report entered without affording him a hearing. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490(h) provides:
(h) Filing Report; Notice; Exceptions. The master shall file his report and serve copies on the parties. The parties may serve exceptions to the report within 10 days from the time it is served on them. If no exceptions are filed within the period, the court shall take appropriate action on the report. If exceptions are filed, they shall be heard on reasonable notice by either party.
Thus, when a party files exceptions to a master’s report the court must grant a hearing if it is requested. Although the trial judge stated in the record that she does not afford hearings on exceptions to master’s reports, we have recently held a hearing to be mandatory if requested by either party. Kay v. Kay, 430 So. 2d 532 (4th DCA 1983). Other portions of this rule have also been held to be mandatory. For example, in Berk v. Berk, 423 So. 2d 1018 (4th DCA 1982), we held that the filing of a transcript of the evidence with the master’s report pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490(f) was also mandatory. Although only a partial transcript of the evidence was filed with the master’s report it must have been adequate to review the points presented because the trial court confirmed the report without comment. In any event, a hearing was required to consider appellant’s exceptions as we held in Kay, supra.
For the foregoing reason, the order appealed from is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
REVERSED AND REMANDED, with directions.
LETTS, C.J., and BERANEK, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ellett v. Ellett, 546 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…rial court on the parties’ exceptions if one is requested. See Fonte v. Alvarez, 491 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Berkheimer v. Berkheimer, 466 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Monyek v. Monyek, 453 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1984); Wyman v. Wyman, 430 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Kay v. Kay, 430 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). The hearing requirement in the general and special master context is mandatory “[i]n order to protect a party’s right to be ultimately heard by the judge in the case_” Kay at 533.…
-
Fonte v. The Honorable F. Dennis Alvarez, 491 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…ovision has been consistently construed to require the judge to conduct a hearing on exceptions to a master’s report. Berkheimer v. Berkheimer, 466 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Monyek v. Monyek, 453 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Wyman v. Wyman, 430 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Kay v. Kay, 430 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). As noted in Kay: In many instances the court has discretion to consider a motion with or without a hearing; however, the rule in question wisely provides that exceptions to a mast…
-
Dehler v. Dehler, 639 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)…s after the master’s report was filed. We have determined that if exceptions are filed, they are to be heard. See also Berkheimer v. Berkheimer, 466 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Kay v. Kay, 430 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); and Wyman v. Wyman, 430 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Our disposition of this issue makes it unnecessary to consider any of the points on appeal regarding the contempt order itself. We reverse and remand to give the parties an opportunity to be heard on the exceptions to the mast…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- KAY v. KAY, 430 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Seena Tonkin Berk v. Berk, 423 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)