ALMA JEANNE SLIZYK, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,

v.

STEVEN ALLEN SMILACK, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT

Citator

Cited By (15 total)

• Belmont v. Belmont, 761 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
  …of the sales of his nonmarital property. The trial court’s ruling was correct because money is fungible, see Williams Management Enter., Inc. v. Buonauro, 489 So. 2d 160, 163 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), and most difficult to trace. See Steiner v. Steiner, 746 So. 2d 1149, 1151 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (“Once the funds were commingled and used for joint expenses, they lost their separate character and became untraceable.”). See also Becker v. Becker, 639 So. 2d 1082, 1084 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (holding that husband was unabl…
• Valentine v. van Sickle, 42 So. 3d 267 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
  …eal, the Wife claims for the first time that the account lost its nonmarital character when two substantial deposits of marital funds were made into the account. See Pfrengle v. Pfrengle, 976 So. 2d 1134, 1136 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008); Steiner v. Steiner, 746 So. 2d 1149, 1150 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Becker v. Becker, 639 So. 2d 1082, 1084 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). In response, the Husband argues that the nonmarital funds were never commingled with marital funds. Unfortunately, the trial court failed to make any findings of…
• Dravis v. Dravis, 170 So. 3d 849 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)
  …counts other than the Janus account were titled in his name alone, this fact is not relevant.”); Pfrengle, 976 So. 2d at 1136 (rejecting the argument that “commingling can occur only when funds are deposited in a joint account”); Steiner v. Steiner, 746 So. 2d 1149, 1150 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (“Even if an account is titled in one spouse’s name alone, it may become marital if both marital and non-marital funds are commingled in that account.”). Whether the account was titled individually or jointly thus makes no d…

Authorities Cited

• Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)