JOHNNY PARHAM, JR., APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
LAURA PARHAM, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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.
In a marital dissolution case, the appellate court reversed the trial court's equitable distribution of marital assets because the court failed to provide a factual basis for its decision to distribute assets unequally, despite acknowledging the legal presumption favoring equal distribution. The court affirmed the alimony award and remanded for the trial court to specifically address statutory factors justifying any unequal distribution.
The court affirmed the alimony award without discussion but reversed the equitable distribution portion because the trial court failed to specifically identify which statutory factors supported the unequal distribution of marital assets. On remand, the trial court must specifically address the facts pertaining to each statutory consideration to justify any unequal distribution.
[1] A court must provide a legally sufficient factual basis to support an unequal distribution of marital assets.
[2] A court must begin with the premise that the distribution of marital assets should be equal, unless there is justification for an unequal distribution based on all releva…
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 intelligence“a court "must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution based on all relevant factors...."”
Establishes the statutory presumption in favor of equal distribution of marital assets under Florida law
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJohnny Parham, Jr. and Laura Parham were parties to a dissolution of marriage proceeding. The circuit court awarded most of the marital assets to Laur…
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
WHATLEY, Judge.
Johnny Parham, Jr., the husband, appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, arguing that the circuit court erred in awarding most of the marital assets to Laura Parham, the wife, without providing a factual basis to support the award and that the circuit court erred in awarding the wife permanent alimony. We affirm the alimony award without discussion, but we reverse the equitable distribution portion of the final judgment.
Section 61.075(1), Florida Statutes (2005), provides that, in distributing marital assets and liabilities, a court “must begin with the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an unequal distribution based on all relevant factors....”1 In a final judgment, a court must provide a legally sufficient factual basis to support an unequal distribution of marital assets. Harreld v. Harreld, 682 So. 2d 635, 636 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996).
In the present case, the circuit court acknowledged that normally there is a presumption in favor of an equal distribution, but it went on to state that it was awarding an unequal distribution “given the unique factors in this case.... ” However, the court did not explain which factor or factors supported the unequal distribution. In Harreld, 682 So. 2d at 636, this court noted that the circuit court made a factual finding that could support an unequal distribution, but it held that the circuit court’s failure to specifically state that this factual finding was the reason it was distributing the assets unequally required reversal. See Feger v. Feger, 850 So. 2d 611, 615 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (“[T]he trial court erred by awarding the marital home, a major asset, without making a specific finding of fact to justify the unequal distribution.”). In reversing the equitable distribution, we note that the circuit court is not precluded from awarding an unequal distribution of assets on remand. “Rather, the court must specifically address the facts pertinent to each statutory consideration to support its decision to distribute the marital assets in an unbalanced manner, if that should be the trial court’s ultimate determination.” Id.
Accordingly, we reverse that portion of the final judgment distributing the parties’ marital assets. On remand, the circuit court may revisit the final judgment without holding further hearings, unless the court concludes that it cannot comply with the statute without taking additional evidence. The remaining portions of the final judgment dissolving the parties’ marriage are affirmed.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part.
STRINGER and KELLY, JJ., Concur. . Section 61.075(1) lists several factors which could justify an unequal distribution of assets.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Valladares v. Junco-Valladares, 30 So. 3d 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…ustification for an unequal distribution based on all relevant factors, ... including those factors set forth in section 61.075(l)(a) through (j), Florida Statutes (2001).” Christ v. Christ, 854 So. 2d 244, 247 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); Parham v. Parham, 968 So. 2d 716, 717 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). In awarding the wife permanent periodic alimony, we hold that the trial court erred because it failed to consider the wife’s finances in light of its concurrent award to her of $1.25 million as lump sum alimony. The trial c…
Authorities Cited
- Harreld v. Harreld, 682 So. 2d 635 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- Feger v. Feger, 850 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)