Barreiro v. Barreiro, s. 79-1672

Decision Date11 December 1979
Docket NumberNos. 79-1672,79-1940,s. 79-1672
Citation377 So.2d 999
PartiesFrank L. BARREIRO, Appellant, v. Patricia BARREIRO, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Susan M. Girsch, Miami, for appellant.

Francis T. O'Donnell, Jr., Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, SCHWARTZ and NESBITT, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Without prior notice, without appropriate pleadings, and over the objection of the husband, the trial judge expanded the scope of an "emergency hearing" which had been set only upon the wife's motion for the enforcement of out-of-state summer visitation with the parties' son, who was in his father's custody. The court thereafter provided, among other things, for temporary child support, transportation costs, grandparents' visitation, the terms of the wife's subsequent visitation, and the imposition of a constructive trust in favor of the appellee on the proceeds of property which she had conveyed to the husband pursuant to a property settlement agreement six years before. In so doing, the lower court was in palpable error. It was plainly improper, and clearly in violation of the appellant's due process rights, to hear and determine matters which were not the subject of appropriate pleadings or notice. Cortina v. Cortina, 98 So.2d 334 (Fla.1957); Matthews v. Matthews, 376 So.2d 484 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), and cases cited; Koken v. Neubauer, 374 So.2d 49 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), and cases cited. Accordingly, with the sole exception of paragraph 1, which dealt with the summer visitation issue, the order of July 25, 1979 under review is, in its entirety,

Reversed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
26 cases
  • Nationstar Mortg., LLC v. Weiler
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 26, 2017
    ...were not the subject of appropriate notice." Levitt v. Levitt, 454 So.2d 1070, 1071 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (citing Barreiro v. Barreiro, 377 So.2d 999, 1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) ); see also Hully v. Hully, 653 So.2d 1138, 1140 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).In Levitt, this court was confronted with a similar......
  • Perez v. Perez, 87-1203
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 9, 1988
    ...Ind., Inc. v. Sunshine Bank, 428 So.2d 341 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); see also Cortina v. Cortina, 98 So.2d 334 (Fla.1957); Barreiro v. Barreiro, 377 So.2d 999 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Matthews v. Matthews, 376 So.2d 484 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); (c) that portion of the judgment granting "custody" of the pa......
  • Dept. of Children and Families v. R.A.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 25, 2008
    ...Johnson v. Johnson, 979 So.2d 350 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); Margulies v. Margulies, 528 So.2d 957 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Barreiro v. Barreiro, 377 So.2d 999 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). 2. Likely as a result of this deficiency, there was no competent substantial evidence—by way of reliable expert testimony,......
  • Hully v. Hully
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 28, 1995
    ...623 So.2d 851 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Devaney v. Solitron Devices, Inc., 564 So.2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Cardet; Barreiro v. Barreiro, 377 So.2d 999 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Additionally, once the wife withdrew her notices of hearing on her motion for default, the husband was entitled to rely o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT