MERRILY KARTER, APPELLANT,
v.
HARVEY KARTER, APPELLEE
MERRILY KARTER, APPELLANT,
HARVEY KARTER, APPELLEE
471 So. 2d 646
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1985)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Holding that the record supports a determination by the trial court that the report of the general master was clearly erroneous, we affirm. See Reichman v. Reichman, 450 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 459 So. 2d 1041 (Fla.1984); Shaw v. Shaw, 369 So. 2d 81 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lasky v. Edwina Z. Davis, 574 So. 2d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…n. Davis’ motion for clarification was filed over one year after Judge Evans’ order was final. Davis’ motion was not timely and the trial court had no jurisdiction to modify Lasky’s support obligation. See Master Cleaners of Miami, Inc. v. Chantres, 471 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Davis v. Fisher, 391 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), petition for review dismissed, 397 So. 2d 777 (Fla.1981); McBride v. McBride, 352 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Bailey. There being no change in circumstances since November…
Authorities Cited
- Trotter v. State, 369 So. 2d 81 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Reichman v. Reichman, 450 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)