Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Murison v. Coral Park Properties, Inc.
Citations: 64 So. 3d 1288; 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 11356; 2011 WL 2848646Docket: No. 4D10-198
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; July 20, 2011; Florida; State Appellate Court
Myrna and William Murison appealed a trial court order dated December 15, 2009, which denied their exceptions to a magistrate's report. The trial court deemed the exceptions untimely and noted the absence of hearing transcripts. Although the denial of exceptions is typically a non-final, non-appealable order, the appellate court treated the appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari and granted it. The appellate court identified two significant errors by the trial court: 1. **Timeliness of Exceptions**: The Murisons' exceptions, dated March 2, 2009, were considered timely under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490(h), which states that service by mail is complete upon mailing. The certificate of service serves as prima facie proof of service. 2. **Denial Without Hearing**: The trial court erred in denying the exceptions without holding a hearing. Established case law requires a mandatory hearing on exceptions if requested, regardless of the absence of transcripts. The Murisons were not permitted to be denied a hearing solely because they had not yet provided transcripts, as long as there was no indication they were refusing to do so. The appellate court concluded that the trial court's actions deprived the Murisons of due process and constituted a significant legal misstep. Additionally, the court noted that previous orders incorporating the magistrate's report and the expiration of the appeal period rendered the harm to the Murisons irreparable. As a result, the petition for writ of certiorari was granted, the December 15, 2009, order was quashed, and the case was remanded for further proceedings. Judges Polen, Hazouri, and Ciklin concurred.