YAILIN ORAMAS
v.
ALEJANDRO EDUARDO PICHS ASENCIO
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.
A trial court does not abuse its discretion when it vacates an order adopting a magistrate's report containing an error and orders a trial de novo pursuant to Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure 12.490(e) and 12.530(a).
[1] A motion to vacate an order filed within 15 days pursuant to Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure 12.490(e) operates as a motion for rehearing under rule 12.530, permitt…
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 intelligence“Any party affected by the order may move to vacate the order by filing a motion to vacate within 15 days from the date of entry. . . . If applicable, a motion to vacate operates as a motion for rehearing under rule 12.530.”
Citation to Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure 12.490(e)(3)–(4) explaining the procedural basis for vacating orders.
The trial court adopted a magistrate's report and recommendation that contained an error in a child support modification case. The trial court subsequ…
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 Trial De Novo cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed January 7, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D25-1406 Lower Tribunal No. 15-28055-FC-04 ________________
Yailin Oramas, Appellant,
vs.
Alejandro Eduardo Pichs Asencio, Appellee.
An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Gisela Cardonne Ely, Senior Judge.
Francisco J. Vargas, P.A., and Francisco J. Vargas, for appellant.
Law Office of Miguel San Pedro, and Miguel San Pedro; Law Office Jesus O. Cervantes, and Jesus O. Cervantes, for appellee.
Before LOBREE, BOKOR and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2
After it adopted a magistrate’s report and recommendation containing an error, the trial court vacated the order modifying child support and ordered a trial de novo. Appellant Yailin Oramas challenges that order on appeal. Finding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in vacating the order and ordering a trial de novo, we affirm. See Fla. Fam. L. R. P. 12.490(e)(3)–(4) (“Any party affected by the order may move to vacate the order by filing a motion to vacate within 15 days from the date of entry. . . . If applicable, a motion to vacate operates as a motion for rehearing under rule 12.530.”); Fla. Fam. L. R. P. 12.530(a) (“On a motion for a rehearing of matters heard without a jury, . . . the court may open the judgment if one has been entered, take additional testimony, and enter a new judgment.”); In re Amends. to Fla. Fam. L. Rules of Proc., 389 So. 3d 1282, 1283 (Fla. 2024) (“Also, we amend rules 12.490 and 12.491 by changing the deadline to file a motion to vacate from 10 to 15 days. We also clarify, in both rules, that ‘a motion to vacate operates as a motion for rehearing under rule 12.530.’”).
Affirmed.