F. A. CONNER, APPELLANT,
v.
G. H. MCNEW AND AAXICO SEMINOLE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEES
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 court held that referring a partnership accounting to an accountant as a special master is proper, even if the accountant is not a lawyer, when the accounting is likely to be lengthy and technical.
Partners agreed to dissolve their partnership and have an accounting. The trial court appointed an accountant as a special master to take testimony an…
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 Special Master Appointment cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant brings this interlocutory appeal to review an order referring a cause for an accounting between the parties to an accountant as special master. The appellant and the appellee are partners. The pleadings reveal that they agree upon a dissolution of the partnership and that there should be an accounting between them. The only question presented is whether the court acted properly in making the reference to the accountant “to take the testimony and proofs of the parties and to report the same to this court, together with his recommendations” where appellant objected to such a reference of this cause under authority of Slatcoff v. Dezen, Fla. 1954, 74 So.2d 59. We affirm.
Rule 1.490(b), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 30 F.S.A., provides:
“(b) Special Masters. The court may appoint members of The Florida Bar as special masters in chancery for any particular service required by it, and they shall be governed by all the provisions of law and rules relating to masters in chancery except that they shall not be required to make oath or give bond unless required by the court. Upon a showing that such appointment is advisable, a *191person other than a member of the bar may be appointed as special master.”
The record reveals and the order of reference finds that the accounting is likely to be lengthy and technical in nature. Under such circumstances the reference to an accountant for the purposes set out in the order is entirely proper, since even before the foregoing rule was adopted the Supreme Court stated that a special master with authority to make findings need not be a lawyer. Powell v. Weger, Fla.1957, 97 So.2d 617, 619.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
ED Skoda Ford, Inc. v. P & P Paint & Body Shop, Inc., 277 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)…n the case sub judice, where the record revealed and order of reference found that the accounting was likely to be lengthy and technical in nature, referring the cause to an accountant as special master is proper. See Conner v. McNew, Fla. App.1970, 237 So. 2d 190. In addition, defendant-appellant made no objection at the time the trial court decided to appoint a special master and in fact, appellant participated fully in the hearing before the master on September 12, 1972. Accordingly, with respect to submit…
-
Reuben Vine & S. Marine Research, Inc. v. Scarborough, 517 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…that it be limited to an accounting based upon the employment agreement with the trial court appointing a special master for purposes of taking testimony and proof. See Goldfarb Novelty Company of Florida, Inc. v. Vann, supra; Conner v. G.H. McNew, 237 So. 2d 190 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970). Finally, the special verdict finding that Scarborough was entitled to ownership of 12.5% of the stock of “SMR Delaware” without making payment therefore is contrary to the evidence and must be reversed. See Stanley v. Powers, 12…
Authorities Cited
- Slatcoff v. Dezen, 74 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 1954)
- Frankenberry v. Stern, 97 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 1957)
- Powell v. Weger, 97 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 1957)