CHARLES HERBERT SPENCER, APPELLANT,
v.
OLGA PRICE SPENCER, 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 a lower court's dismissal of a divorce complaint and counterclaim, holding that the evidence presented was sufficient to grant relief to one party and that the doctrine of recrimination should not bar relief in this case.
Yes, the trial court erred. The evidence presented was sufficient to prove grounds for divorce for the wife or for annulment/divorce for the husband, and the doctrine of recrimination should not have been applied to bar relief.
“We determine that the legal effect of the evidence was sufficient to prove the alleged grounds for divorce on behalf of the wife or the alleged grounds for annulment or divorce on behalf of the husband.”
Establishes that the appellate court found sufficient evidence for relief.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe husband appealed a final decree that dismissed both the wife's complaint for divorce and the husband's counterclaim for annulment or divorce. The …
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 Annulment cases and more on FLexlaw
The defendant, husband, brings this appeal from the final decree dismissing a complaint for divorce brought by plaintiff, wife, and also dismissing the counterclaim for annulment or divorce by the husband.
After hearing all the evidence of all of the parties, the court determined that neither party had produced sufficient evidence in support of his alleged grounds, that neither party was blameless and that neither was entitled to relief.
We determine that the legal effect of the evidence was sufficient to prove the alleged grounds for divorce on behalf of the wife or the alleged grounds for annulment or divorce on behalf of the husband. The explanation or rebuttal of each to the evidence of the other lacks substantial evidentiary value, and there is no real conflict of specific fact. Neither party is domesticated, and the marriage should be dissolved. Chesnut v. Chesnut, 1948, 160 Fla. 83, 33 So.2d 730. The doctrine of recrimination should not be applied here. Its application is most applicable when a party seeks to take advantage of an act or omission which he himself induced. It may be invoked because of the nature of the wrong, either for the benefit of the court and society or for the benefit of the defendant, when to do otherwise would be to allow one party to take an unfair advantage of the other party. Stewart v. Stewart, 1946, 158 Fla. 326, 29 So.2d 247, 170 A.L.R. 1073.
The court should have considered the evidence and entered judgment for one *41party or the other and resolved the property issues.
Reversed.
SMITH, C. J., and WALDEN, J., concur.
FUSSELL, CARROLL W., Associate Judge, dissents.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Firestone v. Firestone, 249 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)…adultery and extreme cruelty. The trial court concluded that neither party was “domesticated” and granted appellee-husband’s counter-claim for divorce citing Chesnut v. Chesnut, 1948, 160 Fla. 83, 33 So. 2d 730, and Spencer v. Spencer, Fla.App.1966, 193 So. 2d 40. I recognize that the findings of the chancellor in an action for divorce are entitled to great weight, and are not lightly to be overturned where there is conflicting testimony at trial. Nonetheless, in my opinion the voluminous testimony in the i…
-
Hurst v. Hurst, 28 Fla. Supp. 46 (Lake Cty. Cir. Ct. 1967)…would subject them both to extreme mental cruelty. An appeal to the Florida Supreme Court was dismissed without opinion, 71 So. 2d. 907. This court also takes note of the recent opinion of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Spencer v. Spencer, 193 So. 2d 40. In that case the wife sued for divorce in the circuit court for St. Lucie County, and the husband counterclaimed for annullment and divorce. After the taking of testimony, the lower court dismissed both the complaint and the counterclaim. The distr…
-
Bostwick v. Bostwick (No. 2), 34 Fla. Supp. 33 (Palm Beach Cty. Cir. Ct. 1970)…e standard of “domestication” necessary for a successful marriage and that their union should be dissolved, as hereinafter provided, in accordance with the principles expressed by the Supreme Court of Florida in the [*36] case of Spencer v. Spencer, 193 So. 2d 40. See, also, Stewart v. Stewart, Fla., 29 So. 2d 247; Chestnut v. Chestnut, Fla., 33 So. 2d 730. The record shows that Albert’s income from trusts is about $80,000 per year, usually supplemented by capital gains which on occasion have caused the ann…
Authorities Cited
- Stewart v. Stewart, 158 Fla. 326 (Fla. 1946)
- Chesnut v. Chesnut, 160 Fla. 83 (Fla. 1948)
- Leatha M. Freeman v. Vocelle, 160 Fla. 83 (Fla. 1948)