JEAN W. PIERRE LOUIS
v.
NATHALIE L. PIERRE LOUIS
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 trial court does not abuse its discretion in entering judgment against a party who fails to move to set aside a default, file a financial affidavit, or respond to discovery.
[1] A party who fails to move to set aside a default, file a required financial affidavit, or respond to discovery waives or is estopped from presenting evidence regarding di…
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 intelligenceThis is a family law case (case number FMCE 2021-0012296) in which Jean W. Pierre Louis appealed a judgment entered by the County Court for the Sevent…
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 Discovery Compliance cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
JEAN W. PIERRE LOUIS, Appellant,
v.
NATHALIE L. PIERRE LOUIS, Appellee.
No. 4D2023-2729
[August 28, 2024]
Appeal from the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Kristin R. Kanner, Judge; L.T. Case No. FMCE 2021- 0012296.
Stephanie G. Morrow of S.G. Morrow & Associates, P.A., North Miami, for appellant.
No appearance filed for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Ries v. Ries, 984 So. 2d 612, 614 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (“Because [the appellant] never moved to set aside the default, did not file a financial affidavit, and failed to respond to discovery, the trial court found that he had either waived or was estopped from presenting evidence regarding [the disputed issues]. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s actions here.”) (internal quotation marks omitted); Topvalco Inc. v. Wolff, 358 So. 3d 747, 749 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023) (“Where an error appears for the first time on the face of an order, a litigant must move for rehearing, to vacate, or for relief from judgment to bring the error to the attention of the lower tribunal.”); Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory.”).
GERBER, CONNER and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.
* * *
2
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Ries v. Ries, 984 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
- Topvalco Inc. v. Wolff, 358 So. 3d 747 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)