Case ID: so2d_537/html/0155-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. GUNTHER, Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Robert LICHTMAN, Appellant, v. Cynthia Marie LICHTMAN, n/k/a Cynthia Marie Weaver, Appellee.
    No. 87-3289.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    Jan. 11, 1989.
    Mark S. London of Law Offices of Mark S. London, P.A., Hollywood, for appellant.
    Nard S. Helman of Helman & Young, Coral Gables, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LETTS and STONE, JJ., concur.

GUNTHER, J., dissents with opinion.

GUNTHER, Judge,

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent. I agree with the majority opinion in that the motion to set aside the final judgment of dissolution was legally insufficient. The motion filed pursuant to rule 1.540(b), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, failed to adequately allege fraud.

However, in my view, the trial court abused its discretion in failing to grant the movant’s ore tenus motion to amend the pleading. Matters should be resolved on their merits and I believe the trial court erred in denying the motion to amend.