Case Name: Louis POLIZZI, Appellant, v. Jennifer L. POLIZZI, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1992-05-29
Citations: 600 So. 2d 490
Docket Number: No. 91-903
Parties: Louis POLIZZI, Appellant, v. Jennifer L. POLIZZI, Appellee.
Judges: HARRIS, J., concurs specially with opinion.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 600
Pages: 490–500

Head Matter:
Louis POLIZZI, Appellant, v. Jennifer L. POLIZZI, Appellee.
No. 91-903.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
May 29, 1992.
Hal Uhrig of Cotter, Uhrig & Valerino, P.A., Winter Park, for appellant.
James J. Disser, Winter Park, for appel-lee.

Opinion:
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal in a marriage dissolution case. Because the trial and the judgment were separated by a long time period and because the oral pronouncements at trial differ with the holdings in the judgment and because the judgment was signed just before the retirement of the trial judge it is appellant's position that the judge did not properly act. Upon a close reading of this matter we are convinced the judgment cannot be supported and that a new trial is warranted, as to all issues except the dissolution of the marital bonds.
The other errors alleged by appellant are now moot and nothing should be considered law of the case.
Finally, we are moved to criticize and suggest the abandonment of what counsel says is a practice of some judges to have each counsel prepare a proposed judgment before trial and submit it to the court at trial. This practice could create an appearance to lawyers and litigants that they are not being heard fairly at trial. Additionally, experience shows that rarely does evidence come out as planned and that issues are resolved or expanded quite often during trial, especially in domestic cases.
The judgment is reversed and this cause remanded for a new final hearing.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
HARRIS, J., concurs specially with opinion.
W. SHARP, J., dissents with opinion.