COUNTRY CLUB PROPERTIES, INC., JAMES E. DEFOE, AND SUSAN G. DEFOE, APPELLANTS,
v.
NANCY J. RILEY, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the trial court’s final judgment with the exception of the damages awarded as compensation for the sale of the Read property on Sandpiper Place. Ms. Riley was a broker-salesman for Country Club Properties, Inc., until her termination on February 7, 1990. It appears without dispute that the Read property was sold on a new listing which was independently obtained by the appellants after Ms. Riley’s listing had expired. Accordingly, the final judgment in favor of Ms. Riley should be amended on remand to reduce the award of damages by $7,603.63.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. Johnson, 725 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…real estate which fall within this ambit are marital assets subject to equitable distribution by this Court. As acknowledged by counsel, this should be an equitable distribution. ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ We find the fifth district’s decision in Cameron v. Cameron, 591 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991) to be strikingly similar to this case. In Cameron, the parties had a prenuptial agreement which contained both introductory and operative clauses. The introductory clause provided: [I]t is the intention of [wife] to waive, relin…
-
Valdes v. Ibis Morejon Valdes, 894 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…i 758 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); see also White v. White, 617 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)(where the parties did not specify alimony in the agreement, the court found that wife did not expressly waive right to alimony); Cf. Cameron v. Cameron, 591 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)(where the Fifth District affirmed trial court’s interpretation of prenuptial agreement as waiving all rights to non-marital property assets . where the agreement specifically provided that: “[I]t is the intention of [wife] to wai…1 / 2
-
Stern v. Stern, 636 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…entions. In particular, we believe the trial court properly concluded that, based on the prenuptial agreement, the former husband waived the right to share in any enhancement in value of the wife’s interest in her businesses. See Cameron v. Cameron, 591 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); See also Timble v. Timble, 616 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). It follows, however, that the trial court erred in assigning the $190,000 in enhanced value to the former wife as part of her equitable distribution. The fact that…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence