KATHERINE ALLISON BLEEMER, APPELLANT,
v.
ROBERT R. BLEEMER, 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 appellate court affirmed the denial of a continuance for a contempt hearing and reversed the trial court's modification of a final judgment after an appeal was filed.
Appellant sought a continuance for a contempt hearing, which was denied. The trial court later modified a final judgment after an appeal was filed.…
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 Jurisdiction After Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant has failed to demonstrate that the trial court’s denial of her motion for continuance of the contempt hearing constituted an abuse of discretion. In re Gregory, 313 So. 2d 735 (Fla.1975); Buckley Towers Condominium, Inc. v. Buchwald, 340 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), cert. denied, 348 So. 2d 945 (Fla.1977).
Where the motion for contempt stated the month and year (i.e., May, 1981), but not the exact date of the appellant’s alleged violation of the court’s order of May 28,1981, there was no showing of prejudice in that the violations continued past May 28, 1981 and their exact dates were established by the evidence. That the appellant willfully and contemptuously disobeyed an order of the court by removing her husband’s possessions from the former marital home, and destroying or causing damage to the home or its contents, was also established by the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. See Demetree v. State, 89 So. 2d 498 (Fla.1956).
After an appeal was taken, the trial court was without jurisdiction to modify or alter the final judgment of dissolution by setting aside an alimony award. Blum v. Blum, 382 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).
Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Dick C.P. Lantz, 440 So. 2d 446 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…ower: It could not enter an order tending to extend or enforce the order appealed. Since [*449] Waltham, every district court in this state has, at least once, vacated a trial court order because it altered a judgment on appeal.2 Bleemer v. Bleemer, 436 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); FMS Management Systems, Inc. v. IDS Mortgage Corp., 402 So. 2d 474 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Owen v. Wilson, 399 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Ponzoli v. Hawkesworth, 390 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Blum v. Blum, 382 So. 2d 52 (F…
Authorities Cited
- Demetree v. State of Fla. ex rel. John D. Marsh, 89 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1956)
- Blum v. Blum, 382 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- In re Gregory v. Gregory, 313 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 1975)
- Buckley Towers Condo., Inc. v. Buchwald, 340 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)