KERRIGAN
v.
ESTATE OF JOHN EDWARD KERRIGAN, PAGE

Fla. 2d DCA | 2024-12-27
No. 2D2023-2186
401 So. 3d 569 2024 FL 14286 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2024) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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.

Synopsis

Constance Kerrigan appealed a final divorce judgment, challenging the trial court's failure to award her an equitable share of the mortgage paydown on her ex-husband's premarital home that was paid with marital funds during the marriage. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed most of the judgment but reversed the equitable distribution component, holding that the $355,674 reduction in mortgage principal paid from marital funds constituted a marital asset subject to equitable distribution.


Holding

Yes. The court held that under Florida Statutes section 61.075(6)(a)(1)(c), the reduction in mortgage principal paid from marital funds is a marital asset, and the non-mortgaged-property spouse is entitled to receive one-half of that paydown amount in equitable distribution.


Headnotes

[1] The reduction in the principal balance of a mortgage secured by nonmarital real property constitutes a marital asset when the mortgage is paid down with marital funds dur…

[2] Marital funds used to reduce the mortgage on nonmarital property create an increase in equity that is a marital asset subject to equitable distribution.

Previewing 2 of 3 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

Key Quotes

“the reduction in the principal balance of a note and mortgage secured by nonmarital real property is a marital asset "if the note and mortgage secured by the property are paid down from marital funds during the marriage."”

Establishes the statutory basis for treating mortgage paydowns as 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 intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The Kerrigans lived in the husband's premarital home (the "Bentcross" property) during their marriage. A $1 million mortgage secured the property. Evi…

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.


Opinion of the Court

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

CONSTANCE KERRIGAN,

Appellant,

v.

DEBORAH KERRIGAN PAGE, as personal representative of the Estate of John Edward Kerrigan, deceased, Appellee.

No. 2D2023-2186

December 27, 2024

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pasco County; Brian Gnage, Judge. Allison M. Perry of Florida Appeals, P.A., Tampa; and Russell G. Marlowe of Russell G. Marlowe, P.A., New Port Richey, for Appellant. Brooke Elvington, Dunedin, for Appellee. NORTHCUTT, Judge.

Constance Kerrigan appeals the final judgment dissolving her marriage to John Edward Kerrigan, raising three issues.1 We affirm as to two of her complaints without comment. But we agree with her remaining assertion that the trial court erred by failing to distribute her

Footnotes
1 Mr. Kerrigan passed away just days before the final judgment was entered. The personal representative of his estate, Deborah Kerrigan Page, has been substituted as the appellee. rightful share of the paydown of a mortgage on Mr. Kerrigan's nonmarital property. During the Kerrigans' marriage, they lived in Mr. Kerrigan's premarital home, which the parties refer to as the "Bentcross" property. At some point they obtained a $1 million loan secured by a mortgage on the Bentcross home. The evidence at the final hearing reflected that the principal balance of the mortgage debt had been paid down with $355,674 in marital funds. Under section 61.075(6)(a)(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2022), the reduction in the principal balance of a note and mortgage secured by nonmarital real property is a marital asset "if the note and mortgage secured by the property are paid down from marital funds during the marriage." Thus, Ms. Kerrigan was entitled to one-half that sum as part of her equitable distribution. See Somasca v. Somasca, 171 So. 3d 780, 783 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (noting "the general rule that '[w]hen marital assets are used during the marriage to reduce the mortgage on non- marital property, the increase in equity is a marital asset subject to equitable distribution' " (alteration in original) (quoting Ballard v. Ballard, 158 So. 3d 641, 643 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014))); see also Frederick v. Frederick, 257 So. 3d 1105, 1110-11 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018) (applying and reaffirming the reasoning in Somasca, 171 So. 3d at 781-83). We reverse the final judgment insofar as it fails to include in the equitable distribution scheme the marital paydown of the Bentcross mortgage, and we direct the trial court to reconfigure the distribution to include that asset. We affirm in all other respects. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for entry of an amended final judgment consistent with this opinion. SILBERMAN and MORRIS, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior publication.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw