..it is a case stemming from an arbitration award, where the 'defendant' wasn't given 'proper service/notice' for the arbitration hearing.. and having not been present at the hearing argued in court, where the plaintiff argued for 'judgment on the arbitration ruling' for the plaintiff... that defendant's case wasn't heard and the ruling was unfair..
The judge basically ruled that because defendant had conversational and email contact w/ the arbitrator, that although misinformation about the hearing scheduling was diseminated in those communications, that in effect, no formal notice by service/mail was necessary...(!?) this in direct violation of Fl code... and the arbitrator cannot provide 'proof of service,' as there was none...
.. so the defendant is appealing that decision and wants a new arbitration hearing, based on 'no service/improper notice'. (the remedy proscribed by statute, where 'no/improper service is at issue)..
Defendant filed the appeal and plaintiff answered . . and defendant, having been informed that he chose the 'Wrong Standard of Review', needs to know, if, in responding to plaintiff's response to the appeal, if the Standard of Review can be changed ('in mid-stream) , from de Novo to the abuse-of-discretion standard?