ROSALY SHEPPARD AND THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLANTS,
v.
ARTHUR SHEPPARD, APPELLEE
ROSALY SHEPPARD AND THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLANTS,
ARTHUR SHEPPARD, APPELLEE
630 So. 2d 1159
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1993)
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the order denying appellant Sheppard’s exceptions to the general master’s report and confirming and approving the general master’s report. “The findings of fact and recommendations of a master should be approved and adopted by a trial, judge unless clearly erroneous, or it appears that the máster has misconceived the legal effect of the evidence.” Barrow v. Barrow, 563 So. 2d 219, 219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Bloom v. Bloom, 414 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Landis v. Landis, 486 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). The court’s ratification and adoption of the master’s report is proper; the master’s findings are supported by the record. • Thus, the order under review is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Barbes v. State, 414 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Bloom v. Bloom, 414 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Lelani Barrow v. Barrow, 563 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Hubbard v. Hubbard, 486 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Landis v. Landis, 486 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)