ADA CARLTON, APPELLANT,
v.
THOMAS N. CARLTON, 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 Florida Supreme Court affirmed a divorce granted to a husband but reversed the denial of alimony to the wife, recognizing her special equity in property acquired through her contributions.
The court held that while the divorce decree was supported by sufficient testimony, the denial of alimony to the wife was improper. The wife was entitled to a reasonable allowance for maintenance and support out of the husband's property due to her special equity.
“but we think the circumstances of this case require some provision to be made for the wife, out of the husband’s property.”
The court's initial assessment of the need for alimony despite the divorce grounds.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA husband was granted a divorce on grounds of habitual indulgence in violent temper and extreme cruelty. The wife, who had contributed significantly t…
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 Habitual Indulgence In Violent And Ungovernable Temper cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
— A divorce was granted to the husband upon the statutory grounds of habitual indulgence in violent and ungovernable temper and extreme cruelty, and the chancellor denied the wife’s application for alimony, and she appealed. There is sufficient testimony to support the decree of divorce; but we think the circumstances of this case require some provision to be made for the wife, out of the husband’s property.
The appellant is the mother of the appellee's six children ; she generously contributed in funds and by her personal exertion and industry through a long period of time to the acquisition and development of his home and other property and the establishment of his fortune. This gives her a special equity in the property which she aided in acquiring and preserving.
The portion of the decree granting a divorce is affirmed, but that portion which denied her any maintenance is reversed, and the cause is remanded for appropriate pro ceeding in awarding ber a reasonable allowance for her maintenance and support.
It is so ordered.
All concur.