Legal Opinion

Woods v. Woods

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 9, 1992No. 92-0019PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

We affirm in all respects, except we comment on two issues not raised by either party. Although we applaud the trial court’s efforts to expeditiously resolve cases, we discourage the practice of bifurcating the issues in dissolution of marriage cases and in entering hand written judgments on those issues. As this court stated in Weasel v. Weasel, 419 So.2d 698, 699 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), “[a] trial court has the power to bifurcate. However, such procedure should be employed with caution and will be the exception rather than the rule.” See also Claughton v. Claughton, 393 So.2d 1061, 1062…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Claughton v. ClaughtonSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
  2. Weasel v. WeaselDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Ventures Trust 2013-I-H-R Ex Rel. JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Ass'n v. Asset Acquisitions & Holdings TrustDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016
  2. Williams v. WilliamsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API