RICHARD MACIER, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
IN RE ESTATE OF BESSIE GIAMPORTONE, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Actual Notice cases and more on FLexlaw
SALTER, J.
Richard Macier and Foreclosure Management Services, Inc. appeal a non-final order of the circuit court, probate division, re-opening the Estate of Bessie Giampor-tone, Appellee, and denying the appellants’ motion to quash service and to dismiss the motion to re-open the Estate. Inasmuch as the probate judge had jurisdiction and the power to re-open the Estate under section 733.903, Florida Statutes (2007), as well as the authority to protect an alleged property interest of the Estate, we affirm.
Macier and Foreclosure Management Services were given the courtesy of notice, based on the personal representative’s knowledge of the name and address of their counsel in other litigation among the parties in the civil division of the circuit court. This afforded them the opportunity to be heard, and it also provided them actual notice of the actions taken in the probate court so that they may move to dissolve the injunction entered there.
At this interlocutory point, and with the matter apparently referred for criminal investigation, the probate judge assuredly did not abuse his discretion or disregard any controlling principle of law.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Blacker v. State, 49 So. 3d 785 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…youthful offender sentence, it must continue that status upon resentencing after a violation of probation or community control. State v. Arnette, 604 So. 2d 482, 484 (Fla.1992); Johnson v. State, 41 So. 3d 1115 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010); Rogers v. State, 972 So. 2d 1017, 1019 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 988 So. 2d 622 (Fla.2008); Hudson v. State, 989 So. 2d 725, 726 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); Gardner v. State, 656 So. 2d 933, 937 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (“once a defendant is sentenced under the provisions of section 958.04,…
-
Christian v. State, 84 So. 3d 437 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)…(Fla. 3d DCA 2010), rev. granted, 58 So. 3d 260 [*440] (Fla.2011); Morency v. State, 955 So. 2d 67, 68 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). On appeal, however, Christian argues that our holding in Robinson should be viewed as conflicting with Rogers v. State, 972 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008), which contains language suggesting that a new crime may only be classified as a substantive violation of youthful offender probation where the defendant is “charged by information -with the new, substantive offense,” id. at 1019…
-
Smith v. State, 143 So. 3d 1023 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…(Fla. 4th DCA 2010)). Smith argues that the trial court erred by revoking his youthful offender status as to his original charges because once a defendant is designated a youthful offender, that status cannot be revoked. Relying on Rogers v. State, 972 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008), the State counters that Smith’s youthful offender status could be revoked once Smith was charged with and convicted of three new substantive offenses. We reject the State’s reading of Rogers and point to our subsequent decision…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence