KHUDOURIE CHAACHOU, PARIS CORP., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, COLUMBIA CORP., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND THE K. CHAACHOU FOUNDATION, A NON-PROFIT FLORIDA CORPORATION, PETITIONERS,
v.
FREDERICKA PHILLIPS CHAACHOU, RESPONDENT
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 Florida Supreme Court granted in part a petition for certiorari challenging interlocutory orders in a family law dispute concerning a claimed common law marriage. The Court quashed an order declaring the parties legally married and remanded for full evidentiary hearing on the merits, while affirming orders denying other relief as barred by prior decisions.
The Court quashed the order declaring the parties legally married and remanded for full evidentiary hearing, directing the chancellor to consider prior testimony as establishing prima facie marriage status while permitting both parties to present additional evidence. The Court affirmed the orders for temporary alimony and suit money as the law of the case had been settled by the prior appellate decision.
“the chancellor was eminently correct in refusing to ignore that decision which settled the law of the case up to that point”
Established that prior appellate decision regarding prima facie common law marriage was binding on the trial court
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFredericka Phillips Chaachou sought to establish a common law marriage with Khudourie Chaachou and sought divorce relief including alimony and suit mo…
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 Suit Money cases and more on FLexlaw
HOBSON, Justice.
This petition for writs of certiorari is directed to four interlocutory orders of the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, dated the 24th day of October, 1956, to wit: (1) Order denying motion of the defendant, Khudourie Chaachou, filed before the court on September 28, 1956, and recorded in Chancery Order -Book 1263, at Page 303;
(2) Order declaring the plaintiff and the defendant, Khudourie Chaachou, to be legally husband and wife, recorded in Chancery Order Book 1263, at Page 301;
(3) Order awarding additional suit money to the plaintiff, recorded in Chancery Order Book 1263, at Page 226;
(4) Order awarding the plaintiff increased temporary alimony, recorded in Chancery Order Book 1263, at Page 227.
We have no difficulty in determining that the petition, insofar as it is directed to Orders (1), (3) and (4) is concerned, should be denied because this court, in a former appearance of this case, Chaachou v. Chaachou, Fla., 1954, 73 So. 2d 830, determined that respondent had established by evidence a prima facie case of a common law marriage between the respondent and the petitioner, Khudourie Chaachou. The chancellor was eminently correct in refusing to ignore that decision which settled the law of the case up to that point.
We are, however, of the view that the Order (2) declaring the plaintiff and defendant, Khudourie Chaachou, to be legally husband and wife should be quashed. Although it may be said that Khudourie Chaachou had an opportunity to attempt to overcome the prima facie case of a common law marriage, the record as well as admissions by counsel discloses that much confusion and delay has been' attendant upon this litigation and the ends of justice appear to require a determination of the paramount questions in this case upon their merits. Consequently, Order (2), that is to say, the order entered October 24, 1956, declaring the plaintiff and the defendant Khudourie Chaachou to be legally husband and wife is hereby quashed and set aside with directions that the chancellor proceed to the taking of testimony upon all questions presented by the pleadings.
In determining the issue of the existence or non-existence of a common law marriage, the chancellor is further directed to consider the testimony which heretofore was taken before the special master as establishing, prima facie, the existence of a common law marriage, and permit either party to this cause to present further evidence if he or she so desires. If the chancellor should ultimately decide that the defendant carried his burden of overcoming the prima facie showing of a common law marriage then, of course, no testimony need be taken upon the question of the plaintiff’s right to a divorce.
The petition for writs of certiorari is granted in part and denied in part.
It is so ordered.
TERRELL, C. J., and DREW and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fredericka Phillips Chaachou v. Khudourie Chaachou, 135 So. 2d 206 (Fla. 1961)…nd final disposition.’ Accordingly, the Judge of this Division of the Court has since such time been the Chancellor in this cause. “Pursuant to the Mandate of the Supreme Court of Florida in Chaachou v. Chaachou (Rehearing denied February 19, 1957) 92 So. 2d 414, directing that the parties be permitted to take further testimony on the issue of common law marriage, this Court entered its Order entitled ‘Order Conclusively Establishing Existence of Common Law Marriage Between Parties’ on the 17th day of July,…1 / 2
-
Nystrom v. Nystrom, 105 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)…tion should have been to vacate the appointment of the special master (despite the special master’s abortive action on the motion) and to begin anew the consideration of the cause at this stage. Feuer v. Feuer, supra; Chaachou v. Chaachou, Fla.1957, 92 So. 2d 414. For the reasons stated, the order of September 3, 1957, is reversed. Upon remand the Chancellor should, we [*610] think, vacate the appointment of the special master and then determine whether testimony is required for a just disposition of the cau…
-
Khudourie Chaachou v. Fredericka Phillips Chaachou, 118 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)…had filed a suit for divorce in Dade County in July of 1952, claiming to be a common law wife. By 1958, after six years of litigation, she had succeeded in establishing that status. See Chaachou v. Chaachou, Fla.1954, 73 So. 2d 830; Id., Fla. 1957, 92 So. 2d 414; Id., Fla.1958, 105 So. 2d 793. In November of 1958 a master was appointed to try the merits of the divorce suit. On May, 7, 1959, a month before the testimony was set to begin before the master on June 8, a motion was filed on behalf of the defend…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Chaachou v. Chaachou, 73 So. 2d 830 (Fla. 1954)