MILDRED HALL, APPELLANT,
v.
FRANK D. HALL, 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.
The court affirmed the dissolution judgment except for requiring the father to continue life insurance covering child support, rejecting the mother's challenges to the alimony denial, retirement plan distribution, and special equity award.
A trial court's dissolution judgment denying alimony, refusing to distribute retirement plans, and awarding special equity is affirmed except that the court must enforce the parties' agreement requiring continued life insurance for child support.
[1] Parties' agreement to maintain life insurance for child support obligations must be enforced in dissolution judgments.
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 intelligenceIn a dissolution of marriage, the wife appealed challenging the trial court's failure to award alimony, failure to account for retirement plans, an aw…
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 Division Of Marital Property cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant seeks review of a final judgment of dissolution wherein she complains that the trial judge “short changed” her in the division of the marital assets, particularly in regard to the following: the failure to award any alimony, the failure to take into account retirement plans, an award of a special equity, and failing to require the appellee to pay an amount of .child support and continue life insurance agreed to by the parties.
An examination of the record and the final judgment discloses that neither party should be entitled to alimony from the other, and that neither party shall be entitled to any distribution from the other’s retirement plan. Our examination of the record and authorities failed to disclose any other error, except a failure to continue the life insurance as agreed by the parties. Bosem v. Bosem, 279 So. 2d 863 (Fla.1973); Longo v. Longo, 533 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988), rev. dism. 542 So. 2d 989 (Fla.1989); Egan v. Egan, 392 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Higgins v. Higgins, 348 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Eberly v. Eberly, 344 So. 2d 886 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); Lithgow v. Lithgow, 340 So. 2d 1283 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Plant v. Plant, 320 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Simon v. Simon, 319 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975).
Wherefore the final judgment under review is affirmed in all respects, except it is hereby amended to require the father to continue life insurance to cover future child support.
Affirmed as hereby amended.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bosem v. Arie Lionel Bosem, 279 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 1973)
- McQUIGGAN v. State, 392 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Eagan v. Eagan, 392 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Longo v. Longo, 533 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)
- Plant v. Plant, 320 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Eberly v. Eberly, 344 So. 2d 886 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- Simon v. Simon, 319 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Lithgow v. Odessa W. Lithgow, 340 So. 2d 1283 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Higgins v. Anne Elizabeth Higgins, 348 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)