DIANE THOMAS, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
DENNIS THOMAS, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed trial court's grant of unilateral buy-option on marital property to former husband, holding such asymmetrical option without time limit violates fairness principles in dissolution proceedings.
A trial court cannot grant one spouse an unilateral option to purchase the other spouse's interest in marital property without granting the same right to both parties and without establishing a definite time frame for exercise.
[1] In a dissolution proceeding, a trial court cannot grant one spouse an exclusive option to purchase the other spouse's interest in marital property without establishing a…
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 intelligence“it was inherently unfair for the trial court to grant the former husband the right to buy the former wife's one half interest in Blackwelder without providing the same right to her”
Court's explanation of why the unilateral option violated fairness principles
Diane and Dennis Thomas divorced. The trial court awarded Dennis an option to buy Diane's one-half interest in property on Blackwelder Road in DeLeon …
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 Valuation Of Marital Assets cases and more on FLexlaw
GOSHORN, Judge.
Diane Thomas (“the former wife”) appeals the final judgment of dissolution which ended her marriage to Dennis Thomas (“the former husband”). We agree with the former wife that the trial court erred in failing to place a value on a parcel the parties owned on Blackwelder Road in DeLeon Springs (“Blackwelder”). Further, we find that it was inherently unfair for the trial court to grant the former husband the right to buy the former wife’s one half interest in Blackwelder without providing the same right to her. The lack of a time frame in which the former husband must exercise the option exacerbates the unfairness of this provision. Cf. Collinsworth v. Collinsworth, 624 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (stating that where judgment set no time limit for effecting partition, it was too indefinite, and thus legally insufficient) (citing Duncan v. Duncan, 379 So. 2d 949 (Fla.1980); Miller v. Miller, 513 So. 2d 199 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)). Therefore, we strike that portion of the final judgment. Pursuant to the remaining provisions, “the 1611 Blackwelder property shall be partitioned by a special master to make a sale of the property and the proceeds shall be distributed by a special master amongst the parties after payment of costs, attorney’s fees, expenses and taxes.”
AFFIRMED as MODIFIED.
HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Duncan v. Duncan, 379 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 1980)
- Collinsworth v. Collinsworth, 624 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
- Otto Miller v. Abbie Jean Miller, 513 So. 2d 199 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)