Summary
The Third District Court of Appeal of Florida affirmed the circuit court's decision in a family-law appeal. The court held that the appellant's issues were not preserved for appellate review because the appellant did not properly challenge the general magistrate's recommended order. The opinion was issued per curiam and was marked not final pending disposition of any timely motion for rehearing.
Holdings
- Issues arising from a general magistrate's recommended order are not preserved for appellate review when the affected party fails to timely move to vacate the order or otherwise file the required exceptions or challenge.
Questions Presented
- Whether the appellant properly preserved the issues raised on appeal by timely moving to vacate or otherwise challenging the general magistrate's recommended order.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (3)
- Mio Gourmet Prods., LLC v. 645 W 27 LLC, 320 So. 3d 998 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)(followed)
- Garrison v. PHH Mortg. Corp., 298 So. 3d 116, 118 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)(followed)
- Fluhart v. Rasmussen, 383 So. 3d 889, 889-90 (Fla. 5th DCA 2024) (en banc)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…