ORLANDO MARIN, APPELLANT,
v.
MARIA E. MARIN, 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 a trial court exceeds its jurisdiction by awarding relief, such as alimony and attorney's fees, that was never pled by the parties.
[1] A trial court may not award relief that is not specifically prayed for in the pleadings.
[2] A party against whom a default is entered is deemed to have admitted only the well-pleaded facts and to have acquiesced in the relief specifically prayed for.
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 intelligenceThe parties divorced and remarried in Cuba before relocating to Florida. The trial court entered a partial final judgment of dissolution, reserving ju…
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 Reservation Of Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
RAMIREZ, J.
Orlando Marin appeals the entry of a partial final judgment of dissolution of marriage, and appellee Maria E. Marin cross-appeals the entry of the final judgment. We reverse the portion of the partial final judgment in which the trial court reserved jurisdiction to award alimony and attorney’s fees because these claims were never pled, and affirm the judgments in all other respects.
The parties married on March 17, 1972 and divorced on September 18, 1979 in Cuba. On September 22, 1979, the parties remarried in Cuba.1 In 1980, the parties relocated to Florida, resided together until July of 1987, and became the parents of Jeanette Melissa Marin. In 1996, the husband married Rosa Caridad Marin.
On January 28, 2002, the trial court entered a Partial Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage, dissolving the parties’ marriage and reserving jurisdiction on the issues of distribution of marital assets, child support, retroactive child support, alimony, retroactive alimony, attorney’s fees, costs and suit monies. Prior to the entry of the partial final judgment, the trial court struck the husband’s pleadings and entered a default judgment against him. On February 12, 2002, the trial court entered a Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage.
A party against whom a default is entered can only be said to have admitted the well-pleaded facts and to have acquiesced in the relief specifically prayed for. See Williams v. Williams, 227 So. 2d 746, 748 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). See also Freeman v. Freeman, 447 So. 2d 968, 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)(it is error to award relief that is not sought).
The wife in this case did not plead entitlement to alimony or attorney’s fees, and merely prayed for divorce and pleaded grounds in support. The trial court thus exceeded its jurisdiction. To hold otherwise deprives the husband of due process. See Williams, 227 So. 2d at 748.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.
. The husband, however, alleged that the parties never remarried and that their marriage dissolved in Cuba on September 18, 1979.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
D'Agostino v. Ccp Ponce, 274 So. 3d 1141 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)…been provided with no authority that a trial court’s mere reference to a document in a reservation of jurisdiction provision somehow supplants a plaintiff’s burden to plead a cause of action premised on that document. See, e.g., Marin v. Marin, 842 So. 2d 273, 274-75 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003); Muhlrad v. Muhlrad, 375 So. 2d 24, 26 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). As the trial court correctly stated at the onset of the deficiency trial, a cause of action must be pled for a trial court to award damages on the cause of acti…
Authorities Cited
- Trella Martinez v. Martinez, 447 So. 2d 968 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Petti v. State, 227 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969)