JOHN S. SUTTON, APPELLANT,
v.
JANN G. SUTTON, 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 court held that the trial court's order denying the motion to dismiss must be affirmed because the appellate record lacks a transcript or stipulated facts of the evidentiary hearing, making the order not fundamentally erroneous on its face.
The husband filed a motion to dismiss the wife's dissolution petition, alleging improper venue and failure to meet residency requirements. The trial c…
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 Venue cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
John Sutton, the husband, appeals the non-final order denying his motion to dismiss or abate the dissolution petition filed by Jann Sutton, the wife. We affirm.
The instant record reveals that the.husband’s motion to dismiss alleged that the wife’s dissolution petition, which was filed in Marion County, was subject to dismissal because (1) proper venue over the dissolution matter was in Okaloosa County, and (2) the wife failed to meet the residency requirement set forth in section 61.021 of the Florida Statutes (1995).1 However, the instant record does not contain a transcript of the evidentiary hearing which was held on the husband’s motion or a stipulated statement of the facts as authorized by rule 9.200(b)(4) of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. As a result, we must affirm the trial court’s order because the order is not fundamentally erroneous on its face. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979).
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON, THOMPSON and ANTOON, JJ., concur. . See § 61.021, Fla. Stat. (1995)(to obtain a dissolution of marriage, one of the parties to the marriage must reside 6 months in the state before the filing of the petition).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Miller v. Miller, 767 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…torney tasks, such as delivery of documents, and were improperly included in the affidavit for fees by appellee’s lawyer. Because there is no record of the hearing in the record on appeal, we cannot determine the first issue. See Sutton v. Sutton, 705 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). The purported transcript attached as an appendix to appellee’s brief is not part of the record. See Altchiler v. Dept. of Professional Regulation, 442 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). As to the second, the affidavit itself is s…
-
Beattie v. Towers, 719 So. 2d 1005 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Hill v. Hill, 706 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); Sutton v. Sutton, 705 So. 2d 1054 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). W. SHARP and ANTOON, JJ., concur. DAUKSCH, J., dissents without opinion.…
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)