DIANE N. WERNTZ, APPELLANT,
v.
DAVID R. FLOYD, 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.
The trial court erred by entering a contempt order without considering timely-filed exceptions to the general master's report, requiring reversal.
A trial court must consider exceptions to a general master's report filed within the ten-day period prescribed by Family Law Rule 12.490(f) before entering an order.
[1] A trial court must afford a party the full ten-day period under Family Law Rule 12.490(f) to file exceptions to a general master's report, computed according to Florida R…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe general master served her report on November 22, 2000, and the trial court entered a contempt order on December 7, 2000, without considering excep…
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 Contempt Of Court cases and more on FLexlaw
WARNER, J.
We reverse the order of contempt because the trial court erred in approving the general master’s report without affording appellant the authorized time to file exceptions. The general master entered and served her report on November 22, 2000, and the trial court entered its order of contempt on the fifteenth day after service, December 7, 2000. The Family Law Rules of Procedure provide that time is computed pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.090. See Fla. Fam. L.R.P. 12.090. Rule 1.090 provides that the day of the act from which the time begins to run shall not be included in computing any period of time prescribed, and five days are added to the prescribed period for service by mail. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.090(a)(e). Under rule 12.490(f), exceptions to a general master’s report must be served within ten days after service of the report. Applying rule 1.090 computation rules, appellant could serve timely exceptions to the report as late as December 7, 2000, which she did. The court’s order of contempt entered on December 7, 2000, without considering the timely filed exceptions, was error. See Jansen v. Jansen, 758 So. 2d 1220, 1220-21 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Moskowitz v. Moskowitz, 611 So. 2d 615, 615-16 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).
Reversed.
KLEIN and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Riley v. Riley, 14 So. 3d 1284 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…rom the time it is served on them.” Pursuant to rule 12.090 and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.090(e), the Husband had an additional five days to serve his exceptions because the magistrate’s report was served on him by mail. See Werntz v. Floyd, 814 So. 2d 480, 481 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Palmer v. Palmer, 582 So. 2d 639, 640 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). In fact, the Wife cites Werntz in her answer brief and recognizes that the Husband was allowed the additional five days to serve his exceptions. The time to se…
-
Calderon v. Calderon, 26 So. 3d 688 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…rom the time it is served on them.” Pursuant to rule 12.090 and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.090(e), the Husband had an additional five days to serve his exceptions because the magistrate’s report was served on him by mail. See Werntz v. Floyd, 814 So. 2d 480, 481 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Palmer v. Palmer, 582 So. 2d 639, 640 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). Id. at 1289. Because the general magistrate entered and served his report on Thursday, October 2, 2008, and Husband mailed (served) his exceptions via express…
Authorities Cited
- Moskowitz v. Moskowitz, 611 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
- Giannina Jansen v. Ulrich Jansen, 758 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)