THEDA NAF, FORMERLY THEDA N. WAHLBERG, APPELLANT,
v.
RAOUL R. WAHLBERG, 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.
In this dissolution of marriage case, the wife appealed the trial court's decision regarding division of jointly owned real property held as tenants by the entireties. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's modification of the divorce judgment, which converted the property from tenancy by the entireties to tenancy in common rather than awarding it entirely to the wife.
The court affirmed the trial court's decisions. The trial court properly found insufficient basis to award compensation for alleged appropriated property, and the findings regarding property held as tenants by the entireties being converted to tenancy in common were supported by competent substantial evidence.
[1] A trial court's findings regarding jointly owned property in a dissolution of marriage proceeding are subject to review for competent substantial evidence.
[2] A trial court may err by failing to make an award to compensate a party for joint personal property and money appropriated by the other party prior to the filing of an ac…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The property of the parties held as estate by entireties shall be held by the parties in accordance with Florida Statutes, 689.15 F. S.A. as tenants in common.”
The modified judgment converting the property from tenancy by the entireties to tenancy in common, the core issue on appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe parties owned two parcels of real estate as tenants by the entireties. In the initial divorce judgment, the court ordered the husband's interest i…
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 Tenancy By The Entirety cases and more on FLexlaw
CARROLL, Judge.
The appellee wife filed a petition for dissolution of marriage. Judgment was entered dissolving the marriage and therein the court ordered that the interest of the husband in two described parcels of real estate owned by the parties as tenants by the entireties should be conveyed to the wife, and that the wife should pay the husband the sum of $20,000. The husband filed a timely petition for rehearing, seeking change or modification of the provisions of the judgment with reference to the jointly owned property.
Following a rehearing upon which testimony was taken, the judgment was amended with respect to such property. In the order entered, the court found the wife had not established an equity in the husband’s interest in the property; that there was no agreement for division thereof, and that the pleadings were inadequate to invoke partition. The order amended or modified the judgment to provide: “The property of the parties held as estate by entireties shall be held by the parties in accordance with Florida Statutes, 689.15 F. S.A. as tenants in common.” A motion for rehearing filed by the wife was denied, and she filed this appeal from the order or judgment entered on rehearing, and from the order denying her petition for rehearing thereof.
The appellant contends first that the court erred by failing to make an award to compensate her for certain items of joint personal property and money which the husband appropriated prior to the filing of the action. In the answer filed by the wife, as affirmative relief it was prayed that the court order the husband to return to her the personal and business records and certain securities which she averred the husband had taken. In response thereto the appellee points out that records taken by the husband were returned later; that while one automobile was taken by the husband a second one was retained by the wife; that the money taken was in a joint savings account, and that there was lack of testimony concerning the securities. On consideration of the record we find no sufficient basis to hold the trial judge in error in that regard.
The second contention of the appellant is that the court committed error by failing to hold that the properties which were jointly owned were the property of the wife. The findings and decision of the trial court regarding the property held by the parties as tenants by the entireties are supported by competent substantial evidence in the record. Steinhauer v. Steinhauer, Fla.App.1971, 252 So. 2d 825; Bergh v. Bergh, Fla.App.1966, 127 So. 2d 481, 487; Valentine v. Valentine, Fla.1950, 45 So. 2d 885.
No reversible error having been shown, the orders appealed from are affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cummings v. Cummings, 330 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 1976)…nd concur with ENGLAND, J. . Article V, Section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution. . 192 So. 2d 514 (Fla.App.1966). . 252 So. 2d 825 (Fla.App.1971). . 263 So.2a 588 (Fla.App.1972). . 277 So. 2d 583 (Fla.App.1973). . Id. at 585. . Naf v. Wahlberg, 288 So. 2d 576 (Fla.App. 1974) ; Steinhmer, supra, see Note 4. . Gordon v. Gordon, supra, see Note 2., . 287 So. 2d 691 (Fla.App.1973). . 262 So. 2d 269, 272 (Fla.App.1972).…
Authorities Cited
- Valentine v. Valentine, 45 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 1950)
- Emil Rossodivita v. The King's Surf Ltd., 252 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)
- Steinhauer v. Lossie S. Steinhauer, 252 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)
- Bergh v. Bergh, 127 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961)
- Allie Pittman v. Mehaffey, 127 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961)