SHARON HENSLEY NEWMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
NATHAN PAUL NEWMAN, 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 Florida District Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from a dissolution of marriage order as premature because the order was not final, as it reserved jurisdiction to determine a factual dispute regarding bank and investment accounts.
The order is not final and the appeal is premature. An order that reserves jurisdiction to determine a factual dispute does not conclusively end the judicial labor in the case and therefore is not final, even if the reservation is conditioned on the introduction of evidence and even if the parties fail to present such evidence.
[1] An order reserving jurisdiction to determine a factual dispute regarding financial accounts is not a final order of dissolution of marriage.
[2] An order is not final if it does not conclusively end the judicial labor in the case, even if the reservation of jurisdiction is conditioned on the introduction of eviden…
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“the order is not final. See Hoffman v. O'Connor, 802 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Klein v. Klein, 551 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).”
Establishes the legal principle that an order reserving jurisdiction on a factual dispute is not final.
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 issued an order purporting to be a final order of dissolution of marriage between Sharon Hensley Newman and Nathan Paul Newman. Howeve…
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 Reservation Of Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Having considered the appellant’s response to the Court’s order of October 9, 2003, we dismiss this appeal as premature. The order on appeal, which purported to be a final order of dissolution of marriage, reserved jurisdiction to determine a factual dispute regarding certain bank and investment accounts. Therefore, the order is not final. See Hoffman v. O’Connor, 802 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Klein v. Klein, 551 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
Although the reservation of jurisdiction is conditioned on the introduction of documentary evidence, which apparently was never introduced, and the order made a conditional finding that the funds had been consumed in the marriage, the order is nonetheless nonfinal because it does not conclusively end the judicial labor in the case. Klein, 551 So. 2d at 1235. Even assuming that the reservation of jurisdiction could be extinguished by the parties’ failure to present documentary evidence, and therefore nothing remained for the court to determine, the instant order would not subsequently become final. See Scott ex rel. Scott v. Women’s Med. Group, P.A, 837 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).
See also Ponton v. Gross, 576 So. 2d 910 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (holding that the order, which stated that the court would dismiss the action if the amended complaint were not filed within the time allowed, was not a final order); United Water Fla., Inc. v. Fla. Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 728 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (holding that the order, which purported to become final on a certain future date in the absence of a petition for a formal hearing, was not a final order).
ERVIN, BOOTH and KAHN, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Demont v. Demont, 24 So. 3d 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…t will be necessary”); Thomas v. Thomas, 902 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (dismissing appeal where “final” order of dissolution reserved jurisdiction to consider reduction in value of asset distributed in equitable distribution); Newman v. Newman, 858 So. 2d 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (dismissing appeal where “final” order of dissolution contained conditional [*700] reservation of jurisdiction to determined issues regarding bank and investment accounts); Hoffman v. O’Connor, 802 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…
-
ATM Ltd. & Ali Marabik Mohamed v. Caporicci Footwear Ltd., 867 So. 2d 413 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…huh & Jemi-gan, 557 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)(holding that order, which purported to dismiss cause for failure to prosecute subject to reinstatement for good cause shown by motion, was not final order dismissing the case). See Newman v. Newman, 858 So. 2d 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). See generally, Edward L. Nezelek, Inc. v. Sunbeam Television Corp., 413 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied, 424 So. 2d 763 (Fla.1982). Because the court therefore retained jurisdiction to enter the final judgment on app…
-
Fischer v. Fischer, 224 So. 3d 919 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)…iction “to consider the issue of a possible reduction in the value of any IRA or pension plan” by the former husband, “indicate[d] that the lower tribunal’s judicial [*920] labor [was] incomplete and rendered] the order nonfinal”); Newman v. Newman, 858 So. 2d 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (Mem.) (dismissing appeal where “final” order of dissolution contained conditional reservation of jurisdiction to determine issues regarding bank and investment accounts). The former husband argues that the reservation of jurisd…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hoffman v. Christi Louise O'Connor, 802 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Alfonson Detroy Ponton and Reginald J. Williams v. Officer B.E. Gross, 576 So. 2d 910 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Klein v. Klein, 551 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- United Water Fla., Inc. v. Fla. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 728 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Scott v. Women's Med. Grp., P.A., 837 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)