JULIAN COSTAS AND JUANA COSTAS, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,

v.

ALEJANDRO MIRANDA AND SARA M. MIRANDA, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES

Citator

Cited By

• Carole v. Knecht, 629 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
  …llocation of liabilities between the parties, notwithstanding the fact that the husband’s income is many times that of the wife. In support of his position the husband cites Benz v. Benz, 557 So. 2d 124 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). See also Hughes v. Hughes, 438 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Gully v. Gully, 311 So. 2d 745 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). We are not persuaded by the husband’s argument. The cited cases must be read in light of the supreme court’s recent pronouncement in Kelly v. Kelly. In our view, Kelly clearly p…
• Hernandez v. Hernandez, 444 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
  …n equitable distribution. The payments were to be made monthly, to commence only when the husband began to practice medicine until $250,-000 was paid. That provision of the final judgment presents the main issue in this appeal. In Hughes v. Hughes, 438 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), we held that an educational degree is not property subject to distribution as lump sum alimony in a dissolution of marriage proceeding because its value, which must be measured by future earning capacity, is too speculative to ca…
• Villaverde v. Villaverde, 547 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
  …rts and to that extent should not be distributed to the wife. See Dewberry v. Dewberry, 455 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Hernandez v. Hernandez, 444 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), pet. for review denied, 451 So. 2d 848 (Fla.1984); Hughes v. Hughes, 438 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); see also Moebus v. Moebus, 529 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (good will of medical practice not element of distributable value), review denied, 539 So. 2d 475 (Fla.1989). The rule that an “equitable” distribution need not be an…