FRANCES M. MULLINS, APPELLANT,
v.
JOHN MULLINS, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1984-12-18
No. 84-617
Before HENDRY, HUBBART and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.
460 So. 2d 566 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The former wife Frances M. Mullins appeals a final judgment of marriage dissolution and contends that (1) the trial court erred in not awarding her the former husband John Mullins’ entire interest in the marital home as lump sum alimony; (2) the trial court erred in its award of equitable distribution; and (3) the trial court erred in awarding her an inadequate monthly amount of permanent, periodic alimony.

We reject these points and affirm because to do otherwise would be to substitute our judgment for that of the trial court on questions of fact and matters of discretion. There was a reasonable basis in this record for the trial court’s decision on each of the points complained of, and we remain unconvinced that no reasonable trier of fact could have reached the decision that the trial court did here. 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); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla.1976); Green v. Green, 442 So. 2d 354 (Fla.1st DCA 1983).

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Pyszka v. Pyszka, 481 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
    …the record on appeal and find that the trial court did not abuse its broad discretion in fashioning an equitable, if not perfect, award. Marcoux v. Marcoux, 464 So. 2d 542 (Fla.1985); Walter v. Walter, 464 So. 2d 538 (Fla.1985); Mullins v. Mullins, 460 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Affirmed.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw