Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Scott-Lubin v. Lubin

Florida Court of Appeals for the Fourth District
49 So. 3d 838 (2010)


Facts

Sheila Scott-Lubin (plaintiff) filed a divorce petition against Paul Lubin (defendant) in 2005. Sheila provided notice of the suit by publication, because she was unable to find Paul, but Paul still failed to appear. A default judgment of dissolution of marriage was entered one year later in 2006. The trial court divided the res and awarded Sheila the marital home, two vehicles, permanent alimony, and attorneys’ fees and costs. Two years later, Sheila sought to enforce the judgment. Paul’s attorney filed an appearance on his behalf, and then Paul appeared at a hearing pro se, or without the assistance of counsel. Paul told the general magistrate at the hearing that he did not pay, because he was not aware of the judgment. The trial court ruled that Paul must pay all alimony owed and court costs. Paul’s lawyer then filed a motion to vacate the final judgment, on the basis that Paul was not personally served with the divorce petition. The trial court found that it lacked jurisdiction to determine the ancillary economic issues due to the fact that Paul was never personally served with a petition for dissolution of marriage. As a result, the trial court held that the 2006 final judgment was void except as to the granting of the divorce itself. Sheila appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Levine, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.