BETTY SHARPE, APPELLANT,
v.
DONALD J. SHARPE, 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 trial court's judgment, finding no reversible error in the dismissal of the divorce complaint.
The plaintiff filed for divorce alleging a common-law marriage, which the defendant contested. The trial court found the plaintiff failed to establish…
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 Common Law Marriage cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal is by the plaintiff below from an adverse judgment in a divorce action. On August 26, 1970, the appellant Betty Sharpe filed a complaint for divorce against the appellee Donald J. Sharpe, alleging a common-law marriage and charging as grounds for divorce that the defendant had been guilty of extreme cruelty and of habitual indulgence in violent and ungovernable temper.
The plaintiff alleged the parties had formed or entered into a common-law marriage in 1966, at a time when such marital unions were lawful in Florida. The defendant contested the plaintiff’s claim of a common-law marriage. Following trial of the cause before the court judgment was entered holding “the plaintiff has failed to establish the existence of a common law marriage”, and dismissing the complaint.
Upon consideration of the record, briefs and argument, we find no reversible error has been shown. The evidence was in conflict on issues relating to material elements essential to a common-law marriage, including the vital issue of whether there was an agreement by the parties therefor. The trail court, as was its province, resolved those issues in favor of the defendant, upon consideration of the conflicting testimony and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom when viewed with the facts and circumstances disclosed. The judgment of the trial court is supported by competent substantial evidence, and the appellant has made no showing which would justify this court in disturbing the decision.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Spencer v. State, 263 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972)…for unsuspecting males whose minds are otherwise occupied than with thoughts of committing heinous crimes. Accordingly, the judgment reviewed herein is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to discharge the defendant. See Liptak v. State, 256 So. 2d 548 (Fla.App.1972). RAWLS and JOHNSON, JJ., concur. . See Justice Terrell’s dissenting opinion in Stanford v. State, Fla., 110 So. 2d 1, at p. 6.…
-
State v. Liptak, 277 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 1973)…McCAIN, Justice. This cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari to review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, reported at 256 So. 2d 548. The decision sought to be reviewed creates conflict with prior decisions on two distinct points, giving this Court jurisdiction under § 4, Article V of the Florida Constitution, F.S.A. Respondents, defendants below, Donald Joseph Liptak and Cesar…1 / 2
-
Liptak v. State, 278 So. 2d 677 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)…PER CURIAM. Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on January 11, 1972 (256 So. 2d 548) reversing the judgments of the Criminal Court of Record for Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and [*678] Whereas, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida by its opinion and judgment filed April…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence