CHARLES E. STEADMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
LINDA R. STEADMAN, 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 appellate court affirmed the trial court's final judgment of dissolution of marriage, finding no abuse of discretion in the equitable distribution of marital assets and liabilities.
A trial court's equitable distribution of marital assets in a dissolution proceeding will not be disturbed on appeal if the total scheme is supported by competent substantial evidence and detailed findings.
[1] A trial court's equitable distribution of marital assets under section 61.075, Florida Statutes, will not be disturbed on appeal if supported by competent substantial evi…
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 intelligenceA former husband appealed a final judgment of dissolution of marriage in which the trial court divided marital assets and liabilities and addressed su…
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 former husband appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We are cognizant that dissolution proceedings present the trial court with the daunting challenge of dividing the assets acquired and liabilities assumed by the parties, and of providing needed support. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197, 1202 (Fla.1980). To that end, the trial court has broad discretionary authority to achieve an overall equitable resolution of the issues, id. and Nurse v. Nurse, 578 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1991), and we will not disturb the result so long as the total scheme of distribution devised by the trial court is supported by competent substantial evidence. Hamlet v. Hamlet, 583 So. 2d 654 (Fla.1991); Kuvin v. Kuvin, 442 So. 2d 203, 206 (Fla.1983). The lower tribunal is entitled to considerable deference in fashioning an equitable distribution pursuant to section 61.075, Florida Statutes. While a 50-50 division of marital assets is an appropriate starting point for equitable distribution, Ervin v. Ervin, 553 So. 2d 230, 231 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), a modestly different apportionment of the assets is proper where, as here, the trial court’s findings support its conclusion. Prom v. Prom, 589 So. 2d 1363, 1364 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). From our review of the record, we conclude that the able trial judge prepared a final judgment that addressed all the disputed issues in detail and supported its holding with findings based on that record. Accordingly, we find no abuse of discretion. The final judgment is
AFFIRMED.
KAHN, MICKLE and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nelida Condinanzo v. Condinanzo, 666 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Orbe v. Orbe, 651 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Steadman v. [*562] Steadman, 645 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).…
-
Edwards v. Edwards, 705 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…1100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). To determine whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying an award of attorney’s fees, the final judgment must be examined as a whole. See Hamlet v. Hamlet, 583 So. 2d 654, 657 (Fla.1991); Steadman v. Steadman, 645 So. 2d 581, 582 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). An examination of this record convinces us that some attorney’s fees should have been awarded to the wife. The husband has an expense account for entertainment, and the company pays for his automotive insurance and tag, re…
-
Vonnoh v. Vonnoh, 132 So. 3d 955 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)…affirm the judgment in all other respects without comment. First, the judgment below erred by requiring a specific annuity election related to the husband’s retirement income plan in the absence of record support. See, e.g., Steadman v. Steadman, 645 So. 2d 581, 582 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (requiring the scheme of distribution devised by the trial court to be supported by competent substantial evidence). Specifically, the judgment required that the parties “shall cooperate to elect the 50% Joint and Survivor A…
Authorities Cited
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)
- Kuvin v. Kuvin, 442 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1983)
- Hamlet v. Hamlet, 583 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 1991)
- Prom v. Prom, 589 So. 2d 1363 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Ervin v. Ervin, 553 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Gray v. State, 578 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Nurse v. Ofscar Emmanuel Nurse, 578 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)