ANTHONY LEE JACKSON, APPELLANT,
v.
GWENDOLYN DILDY, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1999-10-20
Nos. 98-3424, 98-2770
Before NESBITT, GODERICH and SORONDO, JJ.
743 So. 2d 152 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1999) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Father appealed child support orders adopted by the trial court without hearing his timely filed exceptions to the General Master's Report. The appellate court reversed because the trial judge refused to hear argument on the father's exceptions before entering final orders, violating procedural requirements.


Holding

The trial court erred by entering a final order adopting the General Master's Report without conducting a hearing on the father's timely filed exceptions. The court's refusal to hear argument on the exceptions violated procedural requirements.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court commits reversible error by entering a final order adopting a General Master's report without first hearing argument on timely filed exceptions to that repo…

[2] A party's timely filed exceptions to a General Master's report must be heard by the court before a final order adopting the report can be entered.

Previewing 2 of 4 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

Key Quotes

“the trial judge entered an Order on Report of General Master, ratifying and approving same. The Order on General Master's Report was executed by the Court without a hearing on the father exceptions.”

Establishes that the trial court approved the report before hearing the father's exceptions

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The trial court referred child support and visitation matters to a General Master who issued a report on September 1, 1998. The father timely filed ex…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Anthony Lee Jackson (the father) appeals the lower court’s Order to Resign General Master’s Report and the lower court’s Child Support Income Deduction Order and Order Requiring Payment Through Central Depository.

We will not dwell on the long and tortured history of this case. As concerns this appeal, the trial court referred several matters to the General Master. On June 30, 1998, the following matters were heard before the General Master: Gwendolyn Dildy’s (the mother) Motion for Relief from Judgment, Motion for Modification of Support Order, and Motion for Income Deduction. The General Master also heard the father’s Motion for Visitation, Motion to Correct Central Depository Printout, Motion for Relief from March 16, 1995 Judgment and Request for Deviation from Support Guidelines.

On September 1, 1998, the General Master executed his Report on the matters heard. On September 10, 1998, the father filed his Exceptions to General Master’s Report and scheduled a' hearing on the Exceptions for October 26, 1998. However, on September 22, 1998, inexplicably, the trial judge entered an Order on Report of General Master, ratifying and approving same. The Order on General Master’s Report was executed by the Court without a hearing on the father exceptions.

On October 13,1998, the father’s counsel received a Child Support Income Deduction Order and an Order Requiring Payment Through Depository implementing the support provisions of the General Master’s Report and Order. Both orders were dated September 23,1998.

The father filed an Emergency Motion for Reconsideration, Relief from Final Orders and Other Relief seeking to have the September 23, 1998 Orders set aside because the court had not heard the father’s exceptions to the General Master’s Report, which were scheduled for October 26,1998. The father was unable to secure an emergency hearing from the trial court; thus, he filed a Notice of Appeal seeking review of the Order Requiring Payment Through Central Depository and Child Support Income Deduction Order. The parties attended the October 26, 1998 hearing which was to be on the father’s Exceptions to the Report of General Master. It was at the October 26, 1998 hearing that the father first became aware of the trial court’s September 22, 1998 Order on Report of General Master. The Order was not in the file; once the Order was located, the father filed his Motion for Relief From Judgment.

At the October 26, 1998 scheduled hearing, the trial court had just received the transcript of the proceeding before the Master, thus, the trial court had not had an opportunity to review it. The court further refused to hear any argument on the father’s Exceptions. Instead the court instructed the parties to file memoranda outlining their respective positions. On December 4, 1998, the trial court entered an Order Denying the father’s Exceptions to the General Master’s Report and directing the Report to be resigned. This appeal followed.

Our brief factual recitation above can hardly serve to convey the confusion which has apparently reigned in this case. Nevertheless, because the trial judge refused to hear argument on the father’s timely filed Exceptions before entering a final order adopting same, we reverse. Because of the confusing nature of the record we do not reach the other issues raised. Monyek v. Monyek, 453 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.490(h). On remand, the trial court will conduct a full hearing on the father’s Exceptions.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Lehrman v. In re the Guardianship of Janice M. Vondra, 786 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
    …adopting the Special Master’s Report, denying his Exceptions, and granting permanent injunctive relief. Because the trial court entered the order without conducting a hearing on the petitioner’s timely filed Exceptions, we reverse. Jackson v. Dildy, 743 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Monyek v. Monyek, 453 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.490(h). Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw