BOBBY COLLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
BETTY COLLEY, 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 held that the final judgment of dissolution must include findings as to the value and status of assets for equitable distribution.
The former husband contended the trial court inequitably distributed assets and lacked findings on their value and status. The final judgment mentione…
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
PER CURIAM.
Bobby Colley, the former husband, contends that the trial court inequitably distributed the parties’ assets. He complains that the final judgment of dissolution lacks findings as to the value of certain assets and as to their status as marital or non-marital.
The final judgment does find that the parties made gifts to one another during the marriage. Interspousal gifts are to be treated as marital assets. See § 61.075(5)(a)3., Fla. Stat. (1997); Murray v. Murray, 636 So. 2d 536, 538 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). It is not clear, however, that the court treated these interspousal gifts as marital assets.
It is also unclear, absent appropriate findings, why the trial court ordered the distribution of the parties’ assets as it did. Accordingly, we reverse the final judgment of dissolution insofar as it distributes the parties’ property and remand to the trial court for a distribution with findings that comport with the requirements of the statute. See McMonagle v. McMonagle, 617 So. 2d 373, 374 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (“In making an equitable distribution of the parties’ marital assets, the trial judge should reference the relevant .factors set forth in section 61.075(1).”).
Reversed and remanded.
ALLEN, BENTON, and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Maddox v. Maddox, 750 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…us encumbrances until she began the effort of redeeming the property from foreclosure. Under well-established statutory and case law, an interspousal gift during the marriage is a marital asset. See § 61.075(3), Fla. Stat. (1997); Colley v. Colley, 745 So. 2d 1125 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). Accordingly, the circuit judge erred in concluding that because the property was a gift from Mr. Maddox to Mrs. Maddox, it was not marital property subject to equitable distribution. Nevertheless, the judge made sufficient findi…
-
Veda Sherrill Wimberly v. Wimberly, 840 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…g assets as marital or nonmarital, determine the values, and make findings of fact regarding the distribution as required by section 61.075(3), Florida Statutes (2000). See Green v. Green, 788 So. 2d 1083, 1085 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Colley v. Colley, 745 So. 2d 1125, 1125 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Prom v. Prom, 589 So. 2d 1363, 1364 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). REVERSED and REMANDED. BARFIELD, KAHN and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- McMONAGLE v. McMONAGLE, 617 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)
- Harrell Charles Murray III v. Murray, 636 So. 2d 536 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)