REBECCA HELD
v.
WILLIAM HELD
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 Florida Supreme Court affirmed a final decree of divorce, finding that the plaintiff met the burden of establishing residency for jurisdiction and that the defendant failed to prove her defense of condonation.
1. Yes, the plaintiff met the burden of establishing residency. 2. No, the defendant failed to submit the necessary proof for her defense of condonation.
“The burden of showing jurisdiction was on the plaintiff and he met the burden.”
Establishes that the plaintiff successfully proved residency for jurisdiction.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff sought a divorce, and the defendant raised two defenses: lack of jurisdiction due to insufficient residency and condonation of the alleg…
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 Confession And Avoidance cases and more on FLexlaw
We review final decre of divorce.
In short, two contentions are presented as grounds for reversal, i.e. (1) That the record fails to establish residence of the plaintiff in this State sufficient to confer jurisdiction; (2) That defendant sustained her defense of condonation.
The burden of showing jurisdiction was on the plaintiff and he met the burden. The burden of proving condonation was on defendant, as is any other plea by way of confession and avoidance.
We cannot say that it is clearly made to appear that the chancellor erred in holding that defendant failed to submit necessary proof in this regard.
No useful purpose can be served by discussing the conflicting testimony. Appellant is allowed attorneys fees of $100.00 for services of attorneys in this Court to be paid by appellee.
*584No reversible error appears from the entire record.
The decree is affirmed.
So ordered.
Affirmed.
BROWN, C. J., WHITFIELD, BUFORD and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Coons v. Cathlyn Ann Coons, 765 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…al attack in distant courts. Caizza v. Caizza, 291 So. 2d 569, 571 (Fla.1974). As the complainant below, Appellee had the burden to prove that she met the durational residency requirement. See Fazio v. Fazio, 66 So. 2d 297 (Fla.1953); Held v. Held, 151 Fla. 583, 10 So. 2d 129 (1942). Whether or not a complainant is a Florida resident is a question of both fact and law to be settled or determined from the facts of each case. See Fowler v. Fowler, 156 Fla. 316, 22 So. 2d 817 (1945). Appellee filed her petit…