GEORGE STUDDLE, APPELLANT,
v.
CORNELIA STUDDLE, 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 of dissolution of marriage, finding no error in the award of special equity, the order of sale, or the failure to award an interest in the Key Largo property.
The husband appealed a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. The judgment awarded the wife a special equity in the marital home and ordered its s…
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 Special Equity cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant husband seeks review of a final judgment of dissolution of marriage which (a) awarded a $5,100.00 special equity to the wife in the marital home, (b) ordered its sale, and (c) failed to award an interest in the Key Largo property. The marriage had lasted for about six years.
We find substantial competent evidence to support the award of the special equity to the wife in their marital home and sufficient requests for relief to support the order of sale of the marital home. Furthermore, according to facts of this case, the chancellor did not err in failing to award the husband an interest in the Key Largo home, which was in the wife’s name, under the authority of the rule stated in Spector v. Ahrenholz, Fla. App.1958, 107 So.2d 34, at 36:
“ . . .a person who makes a conveyance of his property to another for the purpose of hindering or defrauding creditors is without standing in equity and may not maintain a suit to regain such property from the grantee. [Citations omitted.]”
Therefore, the judgment appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Della-Giustina v. Della-Giustina, 546 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)…ng and not worthy of belief.” The wife had argued below that the husband had transferred the properties to avoid creditors and thus being with unclean hands, could not seek to recover these properties in these proceedings, citing Studdle v. Studdle, 267 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1972), and Marcel v. Marcel, 132 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1961). I gather from the above statement that the trial court disregarded that argument, with which I am in accord. Both Studdle and Marcel predate Ball v. Ball, 335 So. 2d 5 (F…
-
Walker v. Walker, 336 So. 2d 1259 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)…er for the purpose of defrauding his creditors. Kahn v. Wilkins, 1895, 36 Fla. 428, 18 So. 584; Tenny v. Hilton Corporation, Inc., 1939, 140 Fla. 521, 192 So. 180; Hill v. Lummus, Fla.App.3d 1960, 123 So. 2d 365; Studdle v. Studdle, Fla.App.3d 1972, 267 So. 2d 688. Appellant is not in a position to urge the invalidity of the deed or to force a reconveyance of the property; Hill v. Lummus, supra. The judgment appealed is AFFIRMED. McNULTY, C. J., and SCHEB, J., concur.…
-
Fainberg v. Reeva Fainberg, 380 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…, 339 So. 2d 650 (Fla.1976); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla.1976); Koeppel v. Koeppel, 351 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Pfohl v. Pfohl, 345 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Silvers v. Silvers, 274 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973); Studdle v. Studdle, 267 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972); Marcel v. Marcel, 132 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961).…
Authorities Cited
- Johnson v. Vill. OF Va. Gardens, 107 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)
- Spector v. Ahrenholz, 107 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)