JUNE ELLEN SMITH, APPELLANT,
v.
JOEL FRANKLIN SMITH, 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.
A trial judge cannot ignore a request for equitable distribution of assets acquired during a marriage.
The wife sought equitable distribution of assets, including the husband's pension plan contributions made during their four-year marriage. The trial c…
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 Equitable Distribution Of Marital Assets cases and more on FLexlaw
LETTS, Judge.
This appeal presents the question of whether a trial judge can ignore a request for equitable distribution in a marriage dissolution. We hold he should not.
This was only a four-year marriage with one child born from the union. The husband, forty-seven, is a successful surgeon; the wife, forty, is as yet unemployed, working toward a Ph.D. in psychology. It is his third marriage and her first. She leaves the marriage with few assets and modest rehabilitative alimony for twenty-four months. He retains considerable assets, including a luxury home acquired before the marriage, and enjoys a large income. In the same year as the marriage took place, he created a pension plan for his professional association into which he contributed $175,000 during the period the marriage lasted.
In Van Boven v. Van Boven, 453 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), we held it to be error not to consider the equitable distribution of assets acquired during the marriage. Certainly, the contributions to his pension plan were such. See Hirst v. Hirst, 452 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). Accordingly, we reverse and remand this cause.
In terms of time, this union cannot be considered a long-term marriage and we do not choose to offer guidance as to what, if any, would constitute an appropriate equitable distribution. The matter should, however, receive good faith consideration and if the trial judge concludes that no equitable distribution is appropriate, he should “make findings justifying the lack of such a provision.” Van Boven.
In all other respects, the final judgment is affirmed.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
HERSEY, C.J., and GUNTHER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Barrs v. Barrs, 505 So. 2d 602 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…53 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). The matter should be given good faith consideration and if the trial judge concludes that no equitable distribution is appropriate, he should “make findings justifying the lack of such a provision.” Smith v. Smith, 487 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), rev. denied, 496 So. 2d 143 (Fla.1986) (citing Van Boven). See also Danoff v. Danoff, 501 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). Yet there are no requirements, by rule or supreme court decision, that the trial court, when purporting to…1 / 2
-
Danoff v. Burton H. Danoff, 501 So. 2d 1361 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…ny assessment as to what distribution, if any, should take place, but instead remanded the cause with directions to the trial court to make some equitable distribution of the assets accumulated during the marriage. Id. Similarly, in Smith v. Smith, 487 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), rev. denied, 496 So. 2d 143 (Fla.1986), this court reversed and remanded for the trial court to consider equitable distribution of assets acquired during the marriage of a successful surgeon and an unemployed wife and mother whe…
-
Reyher v. Reyher, 495 So. 2d 797 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…491 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 5th 1986) (fifth district remanded case to trial court instructing it to consider only pension benefits acquired during marriage, not “benefits acquired after the dissolution of marriage”) (emphasis in original); Smith v. Smith, 487 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986) (fourth district remanded case to trial court instructing it to consider in equitable distribution the $175,000.00 contributions to the pension plan made during the four-year marriage). Earlier cases have skirted the issue also.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Booth v. The Travelers Ins. Co., 452 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- Hirst v. Hirst, 452 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- van Boven v. Dr. John van Boven, III, M.D., 453 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)