LANCE L. HAHN, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
LYNNE HAHN, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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 a dissolution of marriage case, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment on alimony and asset division but reversed and remanded the dismissal of the wife's battery claim, holding that intentional battery is a recognized exception to interspousal immunity.
The court affirmed the dissolution judgment, alimony award, and asset division. The court reversed the dismissal of the battery claim, holding that intentional battery is a recognized exception to interspousal immunity under Florida law. The court affirmed the dismissal of all other tort claims on the basis that interspousal immunity bars such actions absent recognized exceptions.
[1] A final judgment of dissolution may be affirmed while specific claims arising from intentional torts are reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
[2] Sufficient evidence in the record supports a trial court's discretionary awards of alimony, lump sum alimony, and the allocation of marital assets.
Previewing 2 of 6 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“We affirm the final judgment of dissolution but reverse and remand for further proceedings on cross-appellant's claim for damages arising out of the intentional tort of battery.”
States the core holding of the court, establishing that battery claims are permitted despite interspousal immunity.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLance and Lynne Hahn were involved in a marital dissolution proceeding. The trial court awarded alimony and lump sum alimony to one spouse and divided…
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 Interspousal Immunity cases and more on FLexlaw
STONE, Judge.
We affirm the final judgment of dissolution but reverse and remand for further proceedings on cross-appellant’s claim for damages arising out of the intentional tort of battery.
We affirm as to all issues raised by appellant, as there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the court’s exercise of discretion in awarding alimony and lump sum alimony and in allocating the marital assets. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Thompson v. Thompson, 546 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), remanded on other grounds, 576 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1991); Vanderslice v. Vanderslice, 396 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Fernandez v. Fernandez, 511 So. 2d 656 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), rev. denied, 519 So. 2d 986 (Fla.1988). The record also clearly reflects that the husband’s future pension was, properly, not considered as a source of present income, as he was far from retirement age, but was considered in the division of marital assets. Carroll v. Carroll, 528 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 538 So. 2d 1255 (Fla.1988).
On the cross-appeal, the cross-appel-lee/husband concedes that the court erred in dismissing count III for failure to state a cause of action, since the count did state a cause of action claiming damages from the intentional tort of battery. However, on the cross-appeal as to count IV, we find no error in dismissing the wife’s damages claims on any other theories of liability. The policy of interspousal immunity remains a bar to an action between spouses absent recognized exceptions. See generally, Sturiano v. Brooks, 523 So. 2d 1126 (Fla.1988), declined to extend, Government Employees Ins. Co. v. Fitzgibbon, 568 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Snow-ten v. United States Fidelity and Guar. Co., 475 So. 2d 1211 (Fla.1985). Here, the battery action is the only applicable exception sanctioned by the legislature. § 741.-235, Fla.Stat. (1985).
DELL and WARNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Snedaker v. Snedaker, 660 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)…The issue raised is whether the lower court properly resolved the battery claim in the context of a dissolution proceeding. We find there is nothing improper in pleading a battery claim as a separate count in a dissolution action. See Hahn v. Hahn, 595 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (Wife’s claim for battery was viable in a dissolution proceeding); In re Jaquis, 131 B.R. 1004 (Bkrtcy.M.D.Fla.1991) (Spouse’s claim for infliction of genital herpes allowed in a dissolution proceeding). Moreover, we note that in…
-
Gilliard v. Gilliard, 162 So. 3d 1147 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)…asset, included in its distribution of the parties’ marital assets. Former Husband’s future retirement benefits should not be considered a source of present income; rather, it should be considered in the division of marital assets. See Hahn v. Hahn, 595 So. 2d 1098, 1099 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). The trial court also erred by not making specific findings in its judgment as to all of the factors set forth in section 61.08(2), Florida Statutes. The court stated that it considered all the factors outlined in section…
Authorities Cited
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)
- Sturiano v. Martin Brooks Ad Litem of the Estate of Vito Sturiano, 523 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 1988)
- William deForest Thompson v. Tobitha Thompson, 576 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1991)
- Snowten v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co. & Willie Lee Snowten, 475 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 1985)
- Jenkins v. State, 396 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
- Carroll v. Carroll, 528 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Thompson v. Tobitha Thompson, 546 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)
- Gov't Emps. Ins. Co. v. Kitteridge S. Fitzgibbon, 568 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- Fernandez v. Fernandez, 511 So. 2d 656 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)