RALPH LEE FELTMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
CHARLOTTE HARVEY FELTMAN, 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 court affirmed the dissolution of marriage and attorney's fees award but reversed the post-judgment charging lien order for lack of jurisdiction and excluded inherited warehouse property from marital assets due to insufficient evidence.
A trial court lacks jurisdiction to enter a post-judgment charging lien order when the final judgment does not reserve jurisdiction for that purpose, and inherited property is not marital property absent competent evidence of its marital character.
[1] A trial court lacks jurisdiction to enter a post-judgment order imposing a charging lien when the final judgment does not expressly reserve jurisdiction for that purpose.
[2] Inherited property does not constitute marital property subject to equitable distribution absent competent, substantial evidence establishing its marital character.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHusband and wife divorced; the husband inherited a 9th Street warehouse property with his sister upon their mother's death; the trial court designated…
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 Charging Lien cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The husband appeals from a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, an order liquidating and enforcing a charging lien and a judgment awarding attorney’s fees to his former wife. We affirm the final judgment of dissolution of marriage in all respects, except the designation of the 9th Street warehouse property as a marital asset subject to equitable distribution. There was insufficient competent, substantial evidence to support the trial court’s finding that the 9th Street warehouse property, which was inherited by the husband and his sister upon the death of their mother, constituted marital property.
We also find error in entry of the post-judgment order enforcing and liquidating a charging lien in favor of the husband’s former trial counsel. The trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter the order imposing a charging lien after rendition of the final judgment, which did not reserve jurisdiction for that purpose. We, therefore, reverse the order, See Keister v. Polen, 471 So. 2d 656 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Patin v. Popino, 459 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Frumkes v. Frumkes, 328 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); see also Vazquez v. Vazquez, 512 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).
With respect to the husband’s claim that the trial court erred in awarding attorney’s fees to the wife, we find no error and affirm.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.
POLEN, FARMER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Melvyn B. Frumkes v. Frumkes, 328 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)
- Patin v. Popino, 459 So. 2d 435 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Keister v. Honorable Mark E. Polen, 471 So. 2d 656 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Vazquez v. Vazquez, 512 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)