Burke v. Burke, 864 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). · Go Syfert
Search
Burke v. Burke, 864 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“we remand for reconsideration of the equitable distribution of property. if necessary, on remand the trial court may take additional evidence to make findings to support its determination.”
15 citation events (15 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: McLeod v. McLeod (fladistctapp, 2005-12-09)
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) McLeod v. McLeod (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
we remand for reconsideration of the equitable distribution of property. if necessary, on remand the trial court may take additional evidence to make findings to support its determination.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Patrick J. Shannon, Jr. v. Ryan Hess DC, Indian River Health Center
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2026 · confidence medium
See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979); Burke v. Burke, 864 So. 2d 1284, 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (rejecting statement of evidence because it was not agreed to by the parties nor approved by the trial court).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Cheon v. Martin
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2025 · confidence medium
Burke v. Burke, 864 So. 2d 1284, 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (holding courts “must reject” a statement of 2 evidence that “was not agreed to by the parties, nor approved of by the trial court”); accord Waites v. Middleton, 302 So. 3d 1082 , 1083 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020). * In sum, because Appellant is unable to furnish an adequate record for review, we cannot “reasonably conclude that the trial judge so misconceived the law as to require reversal.” Applegate, 377 So. 2d at 1152 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Schmidt v. Schmidt
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · confidence medium
Because the trial court had not approved either party's statement of the evidence, the Fifth District held that the statement did "not constitute a complete and adequate record for appellate review." Id.; see also Marshall v. Marshall, 953 So.2d 23 , 25 n. 1 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (refusing to consider the husband's statement of the evidence under rule 9.200(b)(4) because the wife objected to it and the trial court was unable to settle and approve it); Burke v. Burke, 864 So.2d 1284, 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (same); Boylan v. Boylan, 571 So.2d 580, 580 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (finding that neither pa…
cited Cited as authority (rule) Hall v. Hall
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2007 · confidence medium
See Barabas v. Barabas, 923 So.2d 588, 590-91 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Burke v. Burke, 864 So.2d 1284, 1285 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Connell v. Capital City Partners, LLC
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
See Reed v. Reed, 914 So.2d 26, 27 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Burke v. Burke, 864 So.2d 1284, 1284-85 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Kanter v. Kanter, 850 So.2d 682, 684 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003).
discussed Cited "see" Donald Lloyd Edman v. Carlene Edman
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2025 · signal: see · confidence high
See Burke v. Burke, 864 So. 2d 1284, 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (“No trial transcript was submitted in the record on appeal and the ‘statement of evidence’ submitted by the former husband was not agreed to by the parties, nor approved of by the trial court.” (emphasis added)).
discussed Cited "see" Department of Health v. Saeed Akhtar Khan
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See Burke v. Burke, 864 So. 2d 1284, 1285 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (reversing despite lack of transcript where the order lacked sufficient findings on assets and liabilities as required by statute); Lafaille, 837 So. 2d at 604 (holding that where a transcript of the proceedings are not provided, the court is “limited to a consideration of any fundamental error which appears on the face of the order”); Damkohler v. Damkohler, 336 So. 2d 1243, 1244 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976) (reversing despite the lack of a transcript where the sentence imposed was contrary to the rule that a person convicted of civil c…
cited Cited "see" Boutwell v. Adams
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Burke v. Burke, 864 So.2d 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Dorsett v. Dorsett
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See Hughes v. Enterprise Leasing Co., 831 So.2d 1240 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)("As it is not a part of the record but merely attached to appellee's brief, this Court cannot review the document on appeal."); see also Burke v. Burke, 864 So.2d 1284, 1284 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Walt v. Walt, 596 So.2d 761 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). [3] But see Mathieu v. Mathieu, 877 So.2d 740 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (treating the lack of adequate findings as an unpreserved error unless previously brought to the trial court's attention); Broadfoot v. Broadfoot, 791 So.2d 584 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (holding a party cannot appeal inadeq…
Dexter S. BURKE, Appellant,
v.
Amy S. BURKE, Appellee.
1D02-3922.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Feb 6, 2004.
864 So. 2d 1284
Wolf.
Cited by 10 opinions  |  Published
Pinpoint authority: bottom 48%

A. Richard Troell, Crestview, for appellant.

David R. Thomas, DeFuniak Springs, for appellee.

WOLF, C.J.

Dexter S. Burke, the former husband, appeals the final judgment of dissolution alleging the trial court erred in (1) designating certain real property as marital assets, and (2) failing to properly identify, value, and dispose of the marital assets and liabilities. We reverse the final judgment in part.

No trial transcript was submitted in the record on appeal and the "statement of evidence" submitted by the former husband was not agreed to by the parties, nor approved of by the trial court. Therefore, we must reject the statement for failure to comply with rule 9.200(b)(4). See Walt v. Walt, 596 So.2d 761 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (finding "statement of evidence" purportedly reflecting evidence presented at child custody hearing would be rejected on appeal where statement was not fully agreed to by adverse party's counsel and had not been approved by trial court). Absent a trial transcript, we may only reverse if an error of law appears on the face of the[*1285] final judgment. See generally, Lafaille v. Lafaille, 837 So.2d 601, 604 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). We, therefore, find no error in the trial court's finding that the real property parcels at issue were marital assets.

The final judgment, however, does not refer to all the marital assets, nor does it identify or value all the marital assets and liabilities. As this court has held, section 61.075(3)(b), Florida Statutes, requires the final judgment to contain sufficient findings regarding assets and liabilities. See, e.g., Town v. Town, 801 So.2d 324, 325 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) ("We do not decide whether the trial court erred in awarding all major assets to Former Wife; however, we reverse and remand the distribution to the trial court because of its failure to make written findings of the value of the various assets distributed."); Green v. Green, 788 So.2d 1083, 1085 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Wetzel v. Wetzel, 671 So.2d 234, 236 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). We remand for reconsideration of the equitable distribution of property. If necessary, on remand the trial court may take additional evidence to make findings to support its determination. See Shoffner v. Shoffner, 744 So.2d 1157, 1158 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).

ALLEN and DAVIS, JJ., concur.