Hernandez v. Zucker

Full title: Yvette Lynn HERNANDEZ, etc., Appellant, v. Mark A. ZUCKER, Appellee.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Date published: Aug 11, 2021

322 So. 3d 1236 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2021)

Opinion

No. 3D20-1397

08-11-2021

Yvette Lynn HERNANDEZ, etc., Appellant, v. Mark A. ZUCKER, Appellee.

Lorenzen Law P.A., and Dirk Lorenzen, for appellant. Marro Law P.A., and Meaghan K. Marro (Plantation), for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Lorenzen Law P.A., and Dirk Lorenzen, for appellant.

Marro Law P.A., and Meaghan K. Marro (Plantation), for appellee.

Before EMAS, MILLER and LOBREE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197, 1203 (Fla. 1980) (noting: "In reviewing a true discretionary act, the appellate court must fully recognize the superior vantage point of the trial judge and should apply the ‘reasonableness’ test to determine whether the trial judge abused [its] discretion. If reasonable [people] could differ as to the propriety of the action taken by the trial court, then the action is not unreasonable and there can be no finding of an abuse of discretion. The discretionary ruling of the trial judge should be disturbed only when [the] decision fails to satisfy this test of reasonableness."); Castillo v. Castillo, 59 So. 3d 221 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) ; Pierre v. Pierre, 185 So. 3d 1264 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).