FLORENCE N. HAAS AND DONALD A. HAAS, APPELLANTS,
v.
MORSE AUTO RENTALS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
FLORENCE N. HAAS AND DONALD A. HAAS, APPELLANTS,
MORSE AUTO RENTALS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
215 So. 2d 507
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1968)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases
Opinion of the Court
Affirmed. See Goldberg v. Straus, Fla. 1950, 45 So.2d 883; Satin v. Hialeah Race Course, Fla.1953, 65 So.2d 475; Stewart v. Texas Company, Fla.1953, 67 So.2d 653; City of Boca Raton v. Mattef, Fla. 1956, 91 So.2d 644; Crutchfield v. Adams, Fla. App.1963, 152 So.2d 808.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Winner v. Winner, 370 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…nt of any gift of personal property, 15 Fla.Jur., Gifts, § 14—19 (1957), and that this requirement is directly applicable to asserted gifts between spouses. Jones v. Ferguson, 150 Fla. 313, 7 So. 2d 464 (1942). As the court said in Fuller v. Fuller, 215 So. 2d 507, 510 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968): “The essential elements of a gift between husband and wife are delivery, actual or constructive, intent of the donor to divest himself of all dominion and con [*847] trol, and acceptance by the donee, which may be presumed…
-
Smith v. Treva E. Smith and Gary Hale, 375 So. 2d 1138 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…rest in the property to the wife is, under the facts and circumstances, legally unenforceable. Since the transfer was part of the conditions of an attempted reconciliation, the transaction was one of contract rather than gift. See, Fuller v. Fuller, 215 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968) and cf. Ball v. Ball, 335 So. 2d 5 (Fla.1976). It is a fundamental principle of the law of contracts that in order for a contract to be binding and enforceable it must be definite and certain as to its terms and obligations. See…
-
Rena K. Sihler v. Sihler, 376 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)…understanding to this effect. “The essential elements of a gift between husband and wife are delivery, actual or constructive, intent of the donor to divest himself of all dominion and control, and acceptance by the donee . . .” Fuller v. Fuller, 215 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968) at 510. In the instant case there is no dispute as to the delivery and acceptance of the ring in question. As to the donor’s intent, we are of the opinion that when the husband went to the expense of having the ring reset to his…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- City OF Boca Raton v. Minda S. Mattef, 91 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 1956)
- Goldberg v. Straus, 45 So.2d 883 (Fla. 1950)
- Stewart v. Tex. Co., 67 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 1953)
- Crutchfield v. Charles W. and Bessie Adams, 152 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963)
- Satin et ux. v. Hialeah Race Course, Inc., 65 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 1953)