DAVID WARRENS TANNER, FORMER HUSBAND, APPELLANT,
v.
MARIA BAEZA TANNER, FORMER WIFE, 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 appellate court reversed the trial court's order setting aside a consent final judgment of divorce, holding that the former wife's post-agreement regret about the settlement terms does not constitute grounds for rescission absent evidence of fraud or overreaching.
A marital settlement agreement freely and voluntarily entered into cannot be set aside merely because one party later experiences buyer's remorse about the terms.
[1] A party's post-agreement regret about settlement terms, without evidence of fraud, overreaching, or misrepresentation, does not constitute grounds for rescission of a mar…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Buyer's remorse is not a sufficient basis for overturning a marital settlement agreement freely and voluntarily entered into.”
The court explained why post-agreement regret cannot justify rescission of a settlement agreement.
The former husband and wife entered into a consent final judgment dissolving their marriage. The former wife signed a sworn written statement affirmin…
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 Overreaching cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The former husband seeks review of an order setting aside a consent final judgment dissolving the parties’ marriage. The trial court based its decision on findings that, notwithstanding a sworn written statement by the former wife that she “entered into th[e] agreement freely and voluntarily,” “there was overreaching in the agreement and misrepresentation [sic] by the Husband of the nature of the proceedings as non-adversarial.” Having carefully reviewed all of the evidence presented to the trial court, we conclude that no reasonable person could have reached the conclusion reached by the trial court and that, accordingly, the trial court abused its discretion. There is no evidence even of a bad bargain on the part of the former wife; rather, the evidence establishes nothing more than that, upon reflection, the former wife felt the terms of the agreement were not in her best interest. “Buyer’s remorse” is not a sufficient basis for overturning a marital settlement agreement freely and voluntarily entered into. See generally Casto v. Casto, 508 So. 2d 330 (Fla.1987). The order setting aside the consent final judgment dissolving the parties’ marriage is reversed.
REVERSED.
WEBSTER, BENTON, and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Moralinda Rachid v. Omaira Torres Perez, 26 So. 3d 70 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…her claim would have failed on the merits. We, therefore, address the argument that Rachid did raise — that there was no meeting of the minds. As to the trial court’s rejection of this argument, we find no abuse of discretion. See Tanner v. Tanner, 975 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (holding that “ ‘[bjuyei^’s remorse’ is not a sufficient basis for overturning a marital settlement agreement freely and voluntarily entered into”); see also BMW of N. Am., Inc. v. Krathen, 471 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) (rej…
-
Tamra E. Pierce v. Linda Marie Pierce in re Estate of Cecilie Redlinger Pierce, 128 So. 3d 204 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…on reflection, [the party to the agreement] felt the terms of the agreement were not in her best interest!,] ‘[b]uyer’s remorse’ is not a sufficient basis for overturning a settlement agreement freely and voluntarily entered into.” Tanner v. Tanner, 975 So. 2d 1190, 1191 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (citing, generally, Casto). This record is devoid of evidence that appellee signed the agreement as a result of fraud, misrepresentation, coercion, or overreaching. Appellee was ably represented by counsel experienced in p…
Authorities Cited
- Casto v. Casto, 508 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 1987)