Steven Wortman v. Christy Wortman , 186 So. 3d 69 ( 2016 )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
STEVEN WORTMAN, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
Appellant, DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
v. CASE NO. 1D14-4699
CHRISTY WORTMAN,
Appellee.
_____________________________/
Opinion filed February 23, 2016.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Nassau County.
Robert M. Foster, Judge.
Christopher W. Wickersham, Jr., of Law Offices of C. W. Wickersham, Jr., P.A.,
Jacksonville, for Appellant.
Appellee Christy Wortman, pro se.
PER CURIAM.
Steven Wortman appeals from a non-final order determining temporary
needs and child custody issues in a pending action for dissolution of marriage. See
Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iii). The order was entered after an evidentiary
hearing at which Mr. Wortman’s counsel was not present due to a calendaring
mistake. Mr. Wortman’s counsel promptly sought reconsideration of the order due
to his absence from the hearing, and the trial court denied reconsideration before
Mr. Wortman filed his timely notice of appeal from the substantive order. Under
these circumstances, we have jurisdiction to review the denial of the motion for
reconsideration, and we do so for abuse of discretion. Panama City Gen. P’ship v.
Godfrey Panama City Inv., LLC, 109 So. 3d 291, 292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
The facts relevant to Mr. Wortman’s motion for reconsideration are
undisputed. The hearing on temporary needs and child custody was held
approximately twenty days after the petition for dissolution of marriage was filed.
Mr. Wortman’s counsel was already of record at the time. On the morning of the
hearing, Mr. Wortman’s counsel went to the wrong courthouse, which is one of
two in the county. Having followed an incorrect notation on his calendar, counsel
ended up at the wrong place at the right time. Upon discovery of the mistake,
counsel’s staff immediately contacted the court, and counsel drove directly to the
correct courthouse. By the time he arrived, the hearing had concluded. Mr.
Wortman had appeared by himself, while his wife, Christy Wortman, was present
with counsel. Under these undisputed facts, the trial court abused its discretion in
failing to vacate the prior order upon Mr. Wortman’s prompt request and hold a
hearing where Mr. Wortman could present his case with his attorney’s assistance.
Cf. Jerue v. Holladay, 945 So. 2d 589, 591 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Fla. Aviation
2
Academy, Dewkat Aviation, Inc. v. Charter Air Center, Inc., 449 So. 2d 350, 353
(Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for vacation of the
order on temporary needs and further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
ROWE, RAY, and SWANSON, JJ., CONCUR.
3