Case Name: Magdalena Sofia Cruz SOLERNOU, Appellant, v. Rafael Jose SOLERNOU, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1984-09-25
Citations: 455 So. 2d 1162
Docket Number: No. 84-634
Parties: Magdalena Sofia Cruz SOLERNOU, Appellant, v. Rafael Jose SOLERNOU, Appellee.
Judges: Before HENDRY, BASKIN and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 455
Pages: 1162–1162

Head Matter:
Magdalena Sofia Cruz SOLERNOU, Appellant, v. Rafael Jose SOLERNOU, Appellee.
No. 84-634.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Sept. 25, 1984.
Hershoff & Levy and Jay M. Levy, Miami, for appellant.
Lamar & Busot and Rene E. Lamar, Miami, for appellee.
Before HENDRY, BASKIN and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The ruling of the trial court is reversed upon a finding that there is no competent, substantial evidence on the record to support its action in this case. Kuvin v. Kuvin, 442 So.2d 203 (Fla.1983); Conner v. Conner, 439 So.2d 887 (Fla.1983); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So.2d 13 (Fla.1976); Schein v. Schein, 448 So.2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).
Reversed.
DANIEL S. PEARSON, Judge, concurring.
I, too, would reverse this final judgment of dissolution of marriage. I would, however, make clear that we are remanding the case for a new final hearing. It appears that the trial court's displeasure with the wife's numerous pre-trial changes of counsel caused it to overlook that the wife, despite the trial court's continued insistence that she obtain counsel, was proceeding without counsel. Of course, the wife was entitled to represent herself and participate in the proceedings, and her silence at the final hearing is hardly an acquiescence in or stipulation to the husband's evidence.