JEFFREY HARRIS, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Klinger v. Klinger, 570 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
  …000 mortgage, was the parties’ only substantial asset. An award of the marital home to one of the parties as alimony, where the home is the sole asset, is inequitable. Satanonchai v. Satanonchai, 522 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Suarez v. Suarez, 514 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), rev. denied, 525 So. 2d 881 (Fla. 1988); Iribar v. Iribar, 510 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Finally, other considerations operate against granting the home to the wife. The home was owned by Mr. Klinger before the marriage. Fu…
• Nestor F. Manrique v. Manrique, 786 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
  …by the husband’s unexplained ability to fund a lifestyle beyond his modest income with “extremely large sums of cash.” * [*1271] This case is distinguishable from cases reversing awards of marital homes as lump sum alimony. Unlike Suarez v. Suarez, 514 So. 2d 428, 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), the parties are not in “roughly equal financial situations.” Nor does the award in this case “force the husband from his modest economic status to a state of relative impoverishment.” Satanonchai v. Satanonchai 522 So. 2d 10…
• Esteban v. Esteban, 523 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
  …parties’ final judgment of dissolution. We find error in the following particulars: 1. The amounts required for alimony and child support are substantially beyond the ability of the husband to pay and therefore must be decreased. Suarez v. Suarez, 514 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Farrington v. Farrington, 390 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), pet. for review dismissed, 399 So. 2d 1142 (Fla.1981); Blum v. Blum, 382 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Consistent with the facts that both parties have an equal interes…

Authorities Cited

• Alphonso Sanders v. State, 450 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)