ANNIE LOU GENTRY, APPELLANT,
v.
LEROY GENTRY, 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.
Affirmed dissolution judgment awarding husband interest in marital home titled as tenancy by entirety, but reversed and remanded due to inadequate stipulation preventing factual determination necessary for special equity analysis.
The court affirmed the dissolution judgment but declined to reach the merits of the special equity award due to an inadequate stipulation that prevented determination of necessary facts regarding the source and tracing of funds used to acquire the marital home.
[1] An appellate court cannot determine the propriety of a special equity award in a dissolution case when the stipulation in lieu of transcript fails to provide adequate fac…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAnnie Lou Gentry and Leroy Gentry were married from 1967 to 1984. The marital home was titled as a tenancy by entirety, and the trial court awarded th…
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 Tracing Of Funds cases and more on FLexlaw
WENTWORTH, Judge.
In this appeal from a final judgment of dissolution of a marriage spanning the years 1967-1984, the appellant wife contends the court erred in awarding the husband her interest in the marital home, titled as a tenancy by entirety. Following the husband’s death while the appeal was pending, his son has been substituted as appel-lee. The issue raised with respect to the special equity award in this case concerns (1) the alleged source of funds for acquisition of the property, i.e., a 1978 lump sum settlement of the husband’s workers’ compensation claim for permanent total disability; and (2) the sufficiency of tracing shown by initial use of such funds for acquisition, followed by a mortgage loan on the premises, diversion of the loan proceeds to other purposes, and satisfaction of the mortgage debt from the husband’s social security payments, without record disclosure of other budgetary details or any basis for allocating the compensation award to loss of earnings during and after the marriage. Because the stipulation presented here in lieu of transcript of the hearing below is wholly inadequate to permit determination of all the necessary facts, we do not reach the novel legal issues raised as to the propriety of the court’s special equity designation, or the alternative applicability of equitable distribution principles to support the award.
Affirmed.
ERVIN and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
THE Florida BAR v. Weed, 513 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 1987)…ARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. . The First District Court of Appeal eventually affirmed the adjudication of delinquency against Weed’s client. . Eventually, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court in Gentry v. Gentry, 480 So. 2d 157 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Driver v. Lafayette County, 463 So. 2d 511, ultimately was dismissed. .The rule reads, in pertinent part: “DR 7-106. Trial Conduct_ (C) In appearing in his professional capacity before a tribunal, a lawyer shall not: ... (7) In…