IAN MARKOFSKY, APPELLANT,

v.

GERTRUDE MARKOFSKY, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Celisseule Nicolas v. Nicolas, 444 So. 2d 1118 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
  …v. Perez, 164 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). Also a Canadian citizen, who otherwise satisfied our statutory residency requirements, was permitted by this court to maintain a marriage dissolution action in the Florida courts. Markofsky v. Markofsky, 384 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Plainly, then, an alien’s foreign citizenship or non-permanent immigration status in this country does not constitute in itself an absolute residency bar to the maintenance of a marriage dissolution action by the alien in the Flo…
• Devindar Maraj v. Maraj, 642 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
  …tensive relief afforded under chapter 61, Florida Statutes, and because the parties’ children, primary residences, property, and extensive business interests are located here. Cf. Siegel v. Siegel, 575 So. 2d 1267 (Fla.1991); Markofsky v. Markofsky, 384 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). In Siegel, the supreme court recognized that there are circumstances warranting a trial court’s denial of a stay, notwithstanding an earlier filing in another jurisdiction. This is not a ease, such as Norris or Bedingfield, wher…
• Siegel v. Siegel, 548 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
  …lorida residence requirements, not withstanding the pendency of prior divorce proceedings in another state. See Gratz v. Gratz, 137 Fla. 709, 188 So. 580 (1939); Cruickshank v. Cruickshank, 420 So. 2d 914 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Markofsky v. Markofsky, 384 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Neither can we give primacy to the New York dissolution proceeding based on the Full Faith and Credit provision of Article IV, section 1 of the United States Constitution, because [*269] that provision applies only to final judgm…

Authorities Cited

• Pawley v. Pawley, 46 So.2d 464 (Fla. 1950)
• Beach v. Farrior, 164 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
• Schrey v. Schrey, 354 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)