Rodriguez v. Roca, 3D17–1746
Decision Date | 06 June 2018 |
Docket Number | No. 3D17–1746,3D17–1746 |
Citation | 254 So.3d 541 |
Parties | Gerardo Vito Roca RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. Aura Yolanda ROCA, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Abogados W, and Milvia Sierra, for appellant.
Aura Yolanda Roca, in proper person.
Before SUAREZ, FERNANDEZ, and LINDSEY, JJ.
Gerardo Roca ("Husband") appeals from the trial court's non-final order granting Aura Yolanda Roca's ("Wife") motion to vacate and amend the parties' marital settlement agreement ("MSA"). We vacate the non-final order and remand for an evidentiary hearing pursuant to Casto v. Casto, 508 So.2d 330, 333 (Fla. 1987).
The parties were married in 1997, and have two minor children. In December 2016, the Husband filed for uncontested dissolution of marriage. The petition was a form Petition for Dissolution from the Family Court Self–Help Program, provided by a private notary public who assisted the parties in filling out the form. That form, along with the MSA, provided for splitting marital property, distribution of debts, child support, no alimony, and parental time-sharing. The form was signed by both parties and notarized. When the parties went to the courthouse and the Family Court clerk examined the documents prior to filing, the Wife indicated she did not agree with the "no alimony" provision of the MSA and allegedly the clerk made a notation to that effect. That document, however, was not filed. The original document that indicated "no alimony" was filed. The Wife then filed a motion to vacate the MSA.
At the hearing on the Wife's motion to vacate, the trial court heard testimony from the notary who helped the couple prepare the Petition and Settlement document, and heard testimony from the Husband. The notary testified that she did not speak English well, but could read and write English well. She testified that she translated the MSA document from English into Spanish so that the couple could better understand. The implication is that she helped them fill out the form, then notarized it. This is the document that indicates both parties waive alimony, and the document that was eventually filed with the court. At the end of the hearing, the judge vacated the MSA and granted the Wife's motion to amend based on the judge's determination that the notary was "probably practicing law without a license" and that "I'm not going to accept an agreement by a notary that doesn't speak English, I'm not convinced that all three people involved knew what was going on." When asked by Petitioner's counsel to make a factual finding on the record of fraud or duress, the judge said, "I just did." The Husband appeals.
To continue reading
Request your trial