QUEEN ELIZABETH COOPER-MEISTER, vs JOSEPH MEISTER,
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed September 1, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D19-2256 Lower Tribunal No. 17-8078 ________________ Queen Elizabeth Cooper-Meister, Appellant, vs. Joseph Meister, Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Spencer Multack, Judge. Diaz Law and Vanessa E. Diaz, for appellant. Florida Family Law Clinic, LLC, and David M. Scott (Fort Lauderdale), for appellee. Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and SCALES and LOBREE, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Curbelo v. Ullman, 571 So. 2d 443, 444 (Fla. 1990) (noting that Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540 was not “intended to serve as a substitute . . . for appellate review of judicial error” but “to provide relief from judgments, decrees or orders under a limited set of circumstances” (quoting Fiber Crete Homes, Inc. v. Div. of Admin., 315 So. 2d 492, 493 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975))); Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“In appellate proceedings the decision of a trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error.”); GMAC Mortg., LLC v. Palenzuela, 208 So. 3d 181, 183 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (observing that generally, in absence of transcript of underlying hearing, or stipulated statement as allowed by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200, challenged order that is not fundamentally erroneous on its face must be affirmed). 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
