LISA RHYNES-PARTLOW
v.
JUANTIA RHYNES
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.
Appellants Lisa Rhynes-Partlow and Juantia Rhynes challenged a final judgment entered against them in the trial court. The appellate court reversed and remanded because the final judgment was signed by a judge who did not preside over the trial, a reversible error under Florida law.
The court reversed the final judgment because it was signed by a judge who did not preside over the trial. Under Florida law, when a successor judge signs a final order based on evidence heard by a different judge, reversal is compelled.
[1] A final judgment must be signed by the judge who presided over the trial or heard the evidence.
[2] An appellate court will reverse a judgment entered by a judge who did not preside over the trial or hear the evidence.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Because the final judgment was signed by a judge that did not preside over the trial, we reverse.”
Statement of the core reversible error and holding of the court
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA final judgment was entered against appellants Lisa Rhynes-Partlow and Juantia Rhynes in the trial court on November 17, 2015. The judgment was signe…
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 Appellate Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
Before APTE, LATIMORE, and ROCHE, J.J.
PER CURIAM.
Appellants, Lisa Rhynes-Partlow and Juantia Rhynes, appeal the trial court’s final judgment entered against them. This Court has jurisdiction under Florida Statute section 26.012(1) and Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(c)(1)(A). Because the final judgment was signed by a judge that did not preside over the trial, we reverse.1 See In re N.C., 834 So. 2d 189, 189 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (court “compelled to reverse” when a different judge signed the final order than the one that presided over the dependency proceedings); Hartney v. Piedmont Tech., Inc., 814 So. 2d 1217, 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (reversing because a successor judge
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, at Orlando, Orange County, Florida, on this 24th
day of October, 2016.
/S/
ALAN S. APTE Presiding Circuit Judge
LATIMORE and ROCHE, J.J., concur. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Order has been furnished to: The Honorable Tina Caraballo, Orange County Judge, Orange County Courthouse, 425 N. Orange Ave., Orlando, FL 32801; Lisa Rhynes-Partlow and Juantia Rhynes, 5077 Stratemeyer Dr., Orlando, FL 32839; and Gary Kornfield, Esq., Law Offices of Gary Kornfield, P.A., 4600 Sheridan St., Suite 203, Hollywood, FL 33021, on this 24th day of October, 2016.
/S/
Judicial Assistant
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Carr v. Byers, 578 So. 2d 347 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Umscheid v. Umscheid, 724 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Hartney v. Piedmont Tech., 814 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- In the Interest of N.C. v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 834 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)