GEORGE M. RANKIN, APPELLANT,
v.
EDITH RANKIN, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1971-07-14
No. 70-588
HOBSON, Acting C. J., and MANN and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
249 So. 2d 741 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1971) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The record does not support the determination that the wife had a special equity in property improved or acquired by the husband during marriage. Accordingly, we must reverse and remand. See Tanner v. Tanner, Fla.App.1967, 194 So.2d 702 and cases therein cited.

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and MANN and McNULTY, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Rankin v. Rankin, 275 So. 2d 283 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)
    …0 per month. The final judgment gave appellee $1500 as lump sum alimony and a special equity in certain property. On appeal we reversed the judgment as it related to the special equity awarded appel-lee, but affirmed in all other respects, Fla.App., 249 So. 2d 741. Meanwhile, during the appeal, appellant had continued paying the $40 per month although no application had been made either to the trial court or to this court for alimony pending appeal. [*284] Upon remand, the lower court entered an amended final…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw