Florida’s appellate courts were busy last week reminding trial judges (and practitioners) that the rules actually matter. Here are the highlights—and a few takeaways—for anyone practicing in family or civil court.
⚖️ 1️⃣ Meredith ex rel. B.M. v. Meredith
Fifth DCA | Sept. 26, 2025
When a judge calls your client’s testimony “incredible” because she filed in the “wrong” county, that’s a problem. The Fifth DCA held that the judge’s comments created a legally sufficient fear of bias and should have led to disqualification.
💡 Takeaway: The domestic-violence statute (Fla. Stat. § 741.30(1)(f)) lets a petitioner file where she lives or temporarily resides. Judges second-guessing venue choices from the bench is never a good look.
💸 2️⃣ Wilson v. Hurter
Second DCA | Sept. 26, 2025
Trial court imputed income to Former Wife at a level she’d never earned—apparently the judge thought she had “untapped potential.” The DCA said: “That’s not how math—or evidence—works.”
The court also fixed an equitable-distribution error where the judge treated all appreciation on a premarital home as marital, without proof that marital funds actually increased its value.
💡 Takeaway: You can’t conjure income or equity out of thin air. Evidence still matters, even in family court.
🏠 3️⃣ Hefley v. Colombo
Third DCA | Sept. 24, 2025
This partition case turned strange when the trial court not only restricted rental of the jointly-owned property (fine), but also banned the lawyer-owner from representing herself and her husband from helping her—issues nobody had even raised.
The DCA called foul: due process means you can’t be ambushed by rulings you never saw coming.
💡 Takeaway: Judges can control property, not people’s right to self-representation—especially when no one asked.
💰 4️⃣ Baumann v. Agudelo
Third DCA | Sept. 24, 2025
The appellant challenged writs of garnishment used to collect family-law fee awards—but didn’t bring a transcript or record of the hearing. The DCA politely reminded everyone that appellate courts aren’t clairvoyant.
💡 Takeaway: No transcript, no reversal. The presumption of correctness isn’t just a rumor.