CLARENCE DUANE CONE, APPELLANT,
v.
HELEN PHILLIPS CONE, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In this dissolution of marriage case, the Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's findings regarding the parties' special equities in their marital home but reversed the award of exclusive possession to the wife, holding that exclusive possession of jointly owned property can only be awarded if it is connected to a support obligation or protects property value, and cannot be granted when a spouse is entitled to no alimony.
Exclusive possession of jointly owned property upon dissolution of marriage must be either directly connected to a support obligation or necessary to protect the property's value for the joint owners' benefit. When a former spouse is entitled to neither permanent nor rehabilitative alimony, she is not entitled to spousal support in any form, including exclusive possession. The exclusive possession award was reversed as it unlawfully deprived the husband of his right to possess his interest and right to partition.
[1] An award of exclusive possession of jointly owned property upon dissolution of marriage must be directly connected to a support obligation or a temporary necessity to pro…
[2] A former spouse not entitled to permanent or rehabilitative alimony is not entitled to spousal support in any form.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“if upon dissolution of marriage a former spouse is entitled to neither permanent nor rehabilitative alimony such person is not entitled to spousal support in any form.”
Establishes that the availability of all forms of spousal support, including exclusive possession, is dependent on entitlement to either permanent or rehabilitative alimony
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court dissolved a childless marriage of less than three years duration. It found the wife had a $14,000 special equity and the husband had a…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Special Equity In Marital Property cases and more on FLexlaw
COWART, Judge.
This case involves exclusive possession of jointly owned property upon dissolution of marriage.
Dissolving a childless marriage of less than three years duration the trial court found the wife had a $14,000 special equity and the husband had a $25,000 special equity in the marital home. The trial court expressly found that the wife was not entitled to either permanent or rehabilitative alimony but awarded the wife the exclusive possession of the home for an unspecified period of time. The judgment provided the wife would be solely liable for mortgage payments, taxes, insurance and other ownership expenses relating to the house and also provided that on its sale she would be entitled to credit for a pro rata share of such expense in proportion to the parties’ interest.
We affirm the trial court’s findings of fact as to the wife’s special equity in the home and as to her ownership of certain personal property in the home but we reverse the provision for exclusive possession.
The two theoretical bases for spousal support upon dissolution of marriage are those supporting rehabilitative and permanent alimony. See Campbell v. Campbell, 432 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). Either of these two species of alimony may be effectuated by one or more of three types or methods of providing such support, viz: periodic. payments, a lump sum payment or the providing of support in kind, such as by awarding exclusive possession of property suitable for shelter. However, if upon dissolution of marriage a former spouse is entitled to neither permanent nor rehabilitative alimo ny such person is not entitled to spousal support in any form.
An award of “exclusive possession” of property upon dissolution of the marriage relationship between joint owners, must either be directly connected with a support obligation1 or a temporary necessity to protect the value of the property for the benefit of the joint owners. Otherwise, the exclusive possession award unlawfully deprives a joint owner of his right to possess his interest in the property and of his right to partition.2 The exclusive possession should be for a specified period of time required for the purpose stated. Duncan v. Duncan, 379 So. 2d 949 (Fla.1980); Ambrose v. Rayne, 412 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). See also Delehant v. Delehant, 442 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). A joint owner of property paying expenses necessarily attendant to the ownership of property is ordinarily entitled to reimbursement from-other joint owners for a proportionate share of such expenses. However, a joint owner is likewise entitled to reimbursement for the use value of his interest when excluded and deprived of the joint use and enjoyment of the property by a joint owner under circumstances where such use value is not provided as “payment in kind” to meet some definite legal duty to support an occupant of the property.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.
DAUKSCH and FRANK D. UP-CHURCH, Jr., JJ., concur. . See Coalla v. Coalla, 330 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976). See also Baldi v. Baldi, 323 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975).
. See Salyers v. Good, 443 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Weisfeld v. Weisfeld, 513 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…solution of marriage proceeding must serve a special purpose and must be directly related to the obligation to pay support or temporarily necessary to protect the value of the property. Duncan v. Duncan, 379 So. 2d 949, 952 (Fla.1980); Cone v. Cone, 449 So. 2d 867, 869 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); see Taylor v. Taylor, 381 So. 2d 1353 (Fla.1980); Schein v. Schein, 448 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Although the special purpose requirement is obviously satisfied in the instant case, the award of exclusive possession of…
-
Phillips v. Lovella Phillips, 83 So. 3d 903 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…arty had a right to force a sale through partition.”). [*905] Because the final judgment sets an end date for the Former Wife’s exclusive use and possession of the marital home, the trial court did not err in making such an award.1 See Cone v. Cone, 449 So. 2d 867, 869 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (“The exclusive possession should be for a specified period of time required for the purpose stated.”); see also Duncan v. Duncan, 379 So. 2d 949, 958 (Fla.1980) (“The trial judge in this instance balanced the needs of the p…
-
Caffin v. Rena Francis Crawford Caffin, 451 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…al finding with a presumption of correctness. See Kuvin v. Kuvin, 442 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1983); Conner v. Conner, 439 So. 2d 887 (Fla.1983); Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Duncan v. Duncan, 379 So. 2d 949 (Fla.1979); Cone v. Cone, 449 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). See also Silver and Pollock, Awards of Exclusive Possession of Marital Residence, 58 Fla.Bar J. 301 (1984). AFFIRMED. ORFINGER, C.J., and STROKER, R.J., Associate Judge, concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Duncan v. Duncan, 379 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 1980)
- Campbell v. Chalermsri V. Campbell, 432 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Coalla v. Coalla, 330 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)
- Baldi v. Baldi, 323 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Dorothea Margaret Delehant v. Delehant, 442 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Salyers v. Good, 443 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Ambrose v. Emmy Rayne, 412 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)