Filed: Aug. 05, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA PETER ANTONACCI, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO Former Husband, FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED Appellant, CASE NO. 1D11-3669 v. JULIANA ANTONACCI, Former Wife Appellee. _/ Opinion filed August 1, 2014. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County. McCarthy Crenshaw, Jr., Judge. Lyman T. Fletcher, Michael R. Phillips, and Eric Friday of Fletcher & Phillips, Jacksonville, for Appellant. Michael Korn a
Summary: IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA PETER ANTONACCI, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO Former Husband, FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED Appellant, CASE NO. 1D11-3669 v. JULIANA ANTONACCI, Former Wife Appellee. _/ Opinion filed August 1, 2014. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County. McCarthy Crenshaw, Jr., Judge. Lyman T. Fletcher, Michael R. Phillips, and Eric Friday of Fletcher & Phillips, Jacksonville, for Appellant. Michael Korn an..
More
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
PETER ANTONACCI, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
Former Husband, FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
Appellant,
CASE NO. 1D11-3669
v.
JULIANA ANTONACCI,
Former Wife
Appellee.
_____________________________/
Opinion filed August 1, 2014.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County.
McCarthy Crenshaw, Jr., Judge.
Lyman T. Fletcher, Michael R. Phillips, and Eric Friday of Fletcher & Phillips,
Jacksonville, for Appellant.
Michael Korn and Mary C. Coxe of Korn & Zehmer, P.A., Jacksonville, for
Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The trial court erred in failing to conform the written order on rehearing to
its oral pronouncement at the hearing on the issue of the parties’ respective
pensions. See Maggard v. Maggard,
844 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Leonard
v. Leonard,
613 So. 2d 1339 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Gallardo v. Gallardo,
593 So. 2d
522 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). We therefore reverse those portions of the order on
rehearing that address the parties’ pensions and we remand with directions to
conform the written judgment to the court’s oral pronouncement that each party
would be entitled to one half of the marital portion of the other party’s pension
value at the time of retirement. Having found no merit to the appellant’s remaining
arguments, we affirm the order in all other respects.
PADOVANO, MARSTILLER, and SWANSON, JJ., CONCUR.
2