MISCHELLE MATTESON, WIFE, APPELLANT,
v.
DAVID A. MATTESON, HUSBAND, 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 affirmed the dissolution judgment but reversed and remanded the equitable distribution of personal property and bank accounts because the trial court failed to make sufficient findings to permit meaningful appellate review.
A trial court's final judgment in a dissolution of marriage must contain specific findings regarding equitable distribution of personal property, bank accounts, and tax refunds to permit meaningful appellate review.
[1] A trial court's failure to make specific findings on equitable distribution of marital assets prevents meaningful appellate review and requires reversal and remand.
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 intelligenceIn a dissolution of marriage proceeding, the former wife appealed the final judgment, raising six issues including a challenge to the trial court's eq…
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 Assets cases and more on FLexlaw
In this appeal from a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, the former wife raises six issues on appeal. In Issue IV, the wife claims that the trial court erred in its equitable' distribution of the parties’ assets. The final judgment does not contain sufficient findings regarding the equitable distribution of personal property, the parties’ bank .accounts, and any tax refunds to adequately review this issue on appeal. The final judgment also indicated that certain attachments would address the equitable distribution, but no such attachments were included in the recoi'd on appeal. This issue is reversed and remanded to the trial court with instructions to make specific findings on equitable distribution. See Williams v. Williams, 133 So.3d 605, 606 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (reversing and remanding for specific findings on equitable distribution where the lack of findings made meaningful appellate review impossible). Also on remand, the trial court should consider whether to include instructions regarding telephone/electronic communication in the'final judgment as argued in Issue VI. In all other aspects, the final judgment is affirmed.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
ROBERTS, C.J., WOLF and KELSEY, JJ., concur.