ALBERT R. CORY, APPELLANT,
v.
DOROTHEA C. CORY, 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 marital dissolution case, the husband appealed the trial court's distribution of marital assets and its failure to rule on the liability of the wife's son. The appellate court affirmed the asset distribution but reversed in part, remanding for the trial court to enter a definitive ruling on the third-party's liability.
The court affirmed the trial court's credibility determinations and distribution of marital assets, finding the trial court did not abuse its broad discretion in this matter. However, the court reversed and remanded on the issue of Walters' liability, requiring the trial court to enter a definitive ruling on this litigated issue to permit appellate review.
[1] A trial court is the sole judge of the credibility of witnesses.
[2] An appellate court will not reevaluate evidence to arrive at conclusions it considers more just or equitable than those of the trial court.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“It is basic that the trial court is the sole judge of the credibility of witnesses.”
Establishes the standard of review for credibility determinations on appeal—trial court's findings are not to be disturbed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAlbert and Dorothea Cory, both in their sixties, married in 1972 after previous marriages. During their eight-year marriage, marital assets were frequ…
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 Distribution Of Marital Assets cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHEB, Acting Chief Judge.
Albert R. Cory, the husband, appeals a final judgment distributing marital assets ancillary to the dissolution of his marriage to Dorothea C. Cory. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
The parties, now in their sixties, were married in 1972. Both had been married previously and each brought certain assets into the marriage. During the eight years the couple lived together, their assets were retitled and moved from account to account many times. In 1980, the wife petitioned and the husband counter-petitioned for dissolution. Final resolution was delayed due to the wife’s incompetency for about two and one-half years and the highly contested nature of the proceedings concerning the parties’ property rights. Early in the course of the litigation, at the husband’s request, the wife’s son by a previous marriage, Jayce P. Walters, was joined as a party. The husband contended that Walters engaged in conduct calculated to divest the husband of certain marital assets. A bifurcated judgment was entered dissolving the marriage. After massive discovery, a final hearing was held to resolve the matter of property distribution. After taking evidence and reviewing written arguments, the trial judge entered a final judgment distributing the marital assets.
On appeal, the husband contends that the trial judge erred in the credence he placed on the parties’ testimony and in the division of marital properties. He also argues that the trial court erred in failing to rule on the liability of the wife’s son, Jayce P. Walters, to the husband or the marital estate.
We reject the husband’s first two contentions. It is basic that the trial court is the sole judge of the credibility of witnesses. Perry v. Perry, 97 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957). While we may not have ordered the distribution of properties in the same manner as the trial judge had we been sitting as trial judges, it is not the province of this court to reevaluate the evidence to arrive at conclusions which we may consider more just or equitable. McCray v. McCray, 493 So. 2d 1117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). A trial court has broad discretion in deciding how marital assets are to be distributed, and we cannot say the court abused its discretion in this case. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Lyons v. Lyons, 436 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).
We agree, however, with the husband’s third contention. We believe the trial court erred in failing to rule on the liability of Jayce P. Walters. Walters’ liability was litigated with considerable testimony being presented on the issue of his involvement in the marital assets of the parties. Therefore, it was the duty of the trial court to enter a definitive ruling on this issue. Otherwise, appellate review on this aspect is impossible.
Accordingly, we affirm the final judgment but direct that the trial court rule on the issue of Walters’ liability. Such order may be appealed by any aggrieved party by the timely filing of a new appeal.
DANAHY and FRANK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Buxton v. Buxton, 963 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…al asset” or “marital liability” as defined. This legal conclusion is reviewed de novo. Id. Assuming an asset or liability is determined to be marital, the trial court has broad discretion in how it distributes that asset or liability. Cory v. Cory, 536 So. 2d 1063, 1064 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). We can see no relevant differences between [*954] the analysis required under section 61.075 and the analysis required under section 61.14(1)(b) that would dictate a different standard of review. “Supportive Relationship”…
-
Jayce P. Walters v. Cory, 596 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)…CAMPBELL, Acting Chief Judge. This appeal arises out of a dissolution of marriage proceeding between appellee, Albert R. Cory, and Dorothea C. Cory, which was the subject of this court’s earlier opinion in Cory v. Cory, 536 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (Cory I). Appellant, Jayce P. Walters, Mrs. Cory’s son by a previous marriage, challenges the trial court order, entered on remand from Cory I, awarding a $1,212,993.66 judgment in favor of appel-lee and finding twenty separate tr…
Authorities Cited
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)
- Nannie Lou Coulter v. Coulter, 97 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1957)
- McCRAY v. McCRAY, 493 So. 2d 1117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Stover v. Elliot L. Miller, 436 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Lyons v. Lyons, 436 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)