ANA CECILIA CHABOTTE, APPELLANT,
v.
STEVEN CHARLES CHABOTTE, 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.
In this marriage dissolution case, the trial court entered a final judgment that dissolved the marriage but failed to address the wife's claims for alimony, equitable distribution of assets and debts, life insurance, and attorney's fees. The appellate court reversed and remanded because the trial court violated statutory duties to distribute marital property and award or deny alimony with findings of fact.
The trial court failed to carry out its statutory duties and the judgment is reversed. The trial court must equitably distribute marital assets and liabilities under section 61.075(1), award or deny alimony with findings of fact under section 61.08(1), and rule on the other claims advanced by the wife, including attorney's fees.
[1] A trial court in a dissolution of marriage case must equitably distribute marital assets and liabilities as required by statute.
[2] In dissolution proceedings, a trial court is required to award or deny alimony with supporting findings of fact.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Judge Korda failed to carry out the statutory duties imposed on trial judges in dissolution cases. Section 61.075(1), Florida Statutes requires the trial court to distribute non-marital assets and liabilities and marital assets and liabilities. Section 61.08(1), Florida Statutes requires the court to award or deny alimony with findings of fact.”
Establishes the court's holding that the trial judge violated mandatory statutory requirements in dissolution proceedings.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage. The wife, as appellant, sought alimony, equitable distribution of marital assets and debts, …
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 Equitable Distribution Of Marital Assets cases and more on FLexlaw
KLEIN, Judge.
In the dissolution of her marriage appellant was seeking alimony, equitable distribution of assets and debts, life insurance, and attorney’s fees. After a trial which took place over two days, Judge Korda did not resolve any of those claims, but rather entered a final judgment which we quote in its entirety:
FINAL JUDGMENT
THIS CASE came on to be heard before this Honorable Court on the 31st day of October 1996 upon verified Petition for Dissolution of Marriage filed herein by the Husband/Petitioner, STEVEN CHARLES CHABOTTE, who was present and represented by counsel, and the Court having reviewed the file, and having heard testimony and the evidence submitted, finds that the Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter hereto, it is thereupon,
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Marriage: The marriage between the Husband/Petitioner, STEVEN CHARLES CHABOTTE and the Wife/Respondent, ANA CECILIA CHABOTTE is irretrievably broken and hereby dissolved.
2. Assets and Liabilities: The Husband/Petitioner and Wife/Respondent shall divide all of their marital assets and -liabilities equally. If the parties are unable to reach an agreement on their own as to a fair division then this matter shall be submitted to mediation which shall be binding.
3. Retention of Jurisdiction: The Court retains jurisdiction as to all proper matters herein other than the actual dissolution.
Although the argument section of appellant’s brief is only one page, that is all that is necessary to make it perfectly clear that Judge Korda failed to carry out the statutory duties imposed on trial judges in dissolution cases. Section 61.075(1), Florida Statutes requires the trial court to distribute non-marital assets and liabilities and marital assets and liabilities.1 Section 61.08(1), Florida Statutes requires the court to award or deny alimony with findings of fact. Even if this judge was unaware of these omissions when he signed the judgment, it was explained to him in appellant’s motion for rehearing, which he denied.
We therefore reverse and remand for the court to equitably distribute the marital assets and liabilities as is required by section 61.075(1), to award or deny alimony with findings of fact as is required by section 61.08(1), Florida Statutes, and to rule on the other claims advanced by appellant, including attorney’s fees.
Reversed.
DELL and FARMER, JJ., concur. . See also, White v. White, 686 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Dease v. Dease, 688 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Keaton v. Keaton, 634 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Romano v. Romano, 632 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Romano v. Romano, 632 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Keaton v. Keaton, 634 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- White v. White, 686 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)
- Dease v. Dease, 688 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)