TAMILYN WHITE
v.
KEVIN WAYNE MORRIS
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.
Amended rule 12.490 applies to pending family law cases after its April 1, 2022 effective date, and appellant's failure to file a motion to vacate within ten days of the magistrate's recommended order resulted in waiver of any challenge to that order.
[1] Procedural amendments to family law rules are applicable to pending cases as of their effective date.
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 intelligenceAppellant sought to modify parental responsibility and relocate with the parties' minor children. A general magistrate issued a recommended order, and…
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 To Relocate cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant challenges the circuit judge’s supplemental final judgment and order on the recommended order ratifying and adopting all the findings and recommendations of the general magistrate. In the final judgment and order, the circuit judge denied Appellant’s supplemental petition to modify parental responsibility and denied Appellant’s petition for relocation with the parties’ minor children. Addressing the only issue preserved for appellate review, we find no error in the application of the amendments to rule 12.490, Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure, to the trial court proceedings after April 1, 2022, the effective date of the amendments. See In re Amendments to Florida Family Law Rules
of Procedure 12.490 & 12.491, & Forms 12.920(a)-(c), 346 So. 3d 1053, 1055 (Fla. 2022) (adopting amended rule); Smith v. Smith, 902 So. 2d 859, 863 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (recognizing “the settled principle of law that procedural or remedial changes in the law are applicable to pending cases”). The Appellant was informed by the magistrate both verbally in court and in the recommended order of the requirement to file a motion to vacate within ten days if she wished to challenge the recommended order. See Fla. Fam. L. R. P. 12.490(e). The then pro se Appellant did not do so. Nor did she file any exceptions to the magistrate’s recommendation as allowed under the superseded rule. See Fla. Fam. L. R. P. 12.490(f) (1995). The supplemental final judgment and order on recommended order is therefore
AFFIRMED.
BILBREY, WINOKUR, and LONG, JJ., concur. _____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lakeyma Gentry and Jabari Luke v. Diandra Jones (Fla. 4th DCA 2024)
Authorities Cited
- Sullivan v. State, 902 So. 2d 859 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)