MATTHEW D. CHRIST, FORMER HUSBAND, APPELLANT,
v.
KATHRYN K. CHRIST, FORMER WIFE, 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.
Matthew Christ appealed a family law order denying his objection to referral of his visitation modification case to a general master. The court held that a party's timely written objection to general master referral must be honored, and the trial court erred in overruling his objection and returning the matter to the general master despite his withdrawal of consent.
The trial court erred and violated Florida Family Law Rule 12.490(b). A referral to a general master requires consent of all parties, and a party who timely files a written objection to referral is entitled to further proceedings in the circuit court. The trial court lacked discretion to override a timely objection and refer the matter back to the general master.
[1] A referral of a matter to a general master requires the consent of all parties; without such consent, the trial court lacks discretion to refer the matter.
[2] A written objection to the referral to a general master must be filed within 10 days of the service of the order of referral.
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“A referral to the general master requires the consent of all parties; and without this consent, the trial court lacks discretion to refer the matter to a general master.”
Establishes the fundamental rule that general master referral cannot occur without all parties' consent
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFormer husband Matthew Christ filed a supplemental petition for modification of visitation. The trial court issued an order of referral to a general m…
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 Petition For Modification Of Visitation cases and more on FLexlaw
WOLF, J.
This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court adopting and ratifying the Second Amended Order of the general magistrate and denying the husband’s supplemental petition for modification of visitation. Appellant, former husband, raises a number of issues on appeal, one of which we find dispositive: whether the trial court erred in denying the former husband’s objection to the order of referral to the general master. A referral to the general master requires the consent of all parties; and without this consent, the trial court lacks discretion to refer the matter to a general master. Swezy v. Bart-Swezy, 866 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).
Florida Family Law Rule 12.490(b) provides in part:
(1) No matter shall be heard by a general master without an appropriate order of reference and the consent to the referral of all parties. Consent, as defined in this rule, to a specific referral, once given, cannot be withdrawn without good cause shown before the hearing on the merits of the matter referred. Con sent may be express or may be implied in accordance with the requirements of this rule.
(A) A written objection to the referral to a general master must be filed within 10 days of the service of the order of referral.
In the instant case, the former husband’s objection to referral was timely filed and acknowledged by the general master who relinquished jurisdiction back to the trial court pursuant to rule 12.490(b). However, upon receiving notice of the timely objection, the trial court denied the former husband’s objection and sent the matter back to the general master. The rule is clearly stated. Where a party withholds consent and files a timely objection to the referral to a magistrate, that party is entitled to further proceedings in the circuit court. Swezy, 866 So. 2d at 1249. Although this issue may be raised through a writ of mandamus or a writ of prohibition, the matter is also properly reviewed on appeal of a final order adopting the general master’s recommendations. Young v. Young, 816 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Thus, we are constrained to reverse the trial court’s order adopting the Second Amended Report and Recommendation and denying the former husband’s Supplemental Petition for Modification of Visitation.
PADOVANO and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Garcia v. Garcia, 958 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…er on Status three days prior to the general magistrate’s action. To the extent that the former wife seeks relief from the order denying her timely objection to the referral, we treat her request as one for a writ of mandamus. See Christ v. Christ, 939 So. 2d 256, 257 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)(timely objection to a magistrate referral may be raised through a writ of mandamus or a writ of prohibition); Novartis Pharm. Corp. v. Carnoto, 798 So. 2d 22, 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)(“Mandamus lies to compel a trial court to…
-
Teague v. Girtman, 67 So. 3d 284 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…time limit to respond. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.090(e); Calderon v. Calderon, 26 So. 3d 688 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (reversing final dissolution judgment because husband’s objections to magistrate’s report were timely under mailbox rule); Christ v. Christ, 939 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (reversing order denying modification of visitation based on timely objection to magistrate referral).…
-
Humphrey v. Humphrey, 296 So. 3d 536 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)…a magistrate is ignored,” the order must be reversed. Id. As in Skelly, the former husband here renewed his objection to the general magistrate hearing the case after the magistrate’s report and recommendations issued. Our case Christ v. Christ, 939 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006), is also instructive. There, writing for the court, Judge Wolf said, “The rule is clearly stated. Where a party withholds consent and files a timely objection to the referral to a magistrate, that party is entitled to further p…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Sanders v. State, 816 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
- Young v. Luisa Corcuera Young, 816 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- State v. V.R., 866 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- Lewis v. Swezy, 866 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)