BERNARD J. FOX, APPELLANT,
v.
DOROTHY M. FOX, 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 a divorce proceeding where parties stipulated to a final judgment with reserved jurisdiction over equitable claims to real estate, the trial court found the wife had a special equity in jointly-owned home property based on her substantial contributions and ordered the husband to convey his interest to her. The husband appealed arguing the court lacked jurisdiction to order such relief.
The trial court had jurisdiction to award the wife the husband's interest in the home property. By stipulating to reserved jurisdiction over equitable claims to real estate and specifically submitting their respective claims of equities in real estate to the court for resolution and disposition, the parties invoked the court's equitable powers, which authorized the court to award the home property to the wife based on her substantial contributions.
[1] A court retains jurisdiction to enter orders regarding the equities of parties in real estate when the final judgment of dissolution expressly reserves such jurisdiction.
[2] Parties may stipulate to the court's jurisdiction to resolve claims of equitable distribution of real estate after the entry of a final judgment of dissolution.
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 parties specifically submitted to the court, for resolution and disposition, their respective claims of equities in real estate within the court's jurisdiction”
Establishes that parties voluntarily invoked the court's equitable jurisdiction over real property claims
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 were married for 27 years and jointly owned a home purchased in 1952. The wife contributed the bulk of the down payment funds and substant…
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 Reservation Of Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
SMITH, Judge.
The parties to this marriage dissolution proceeding stipulated to the entry of a final judgment by which the court dissolved their marriage of 27 years and “reserve [d] jurisdiction to enter Orders as regards the equities of the parties in real estate” and other matters which the parties requested be considered after entry of the final judgment. Thereafter the parties developed evidence before a special master concerning their respective contributions to the jointly owned home property. The circuit judge then found a “special equity” of the wife in her husband’s interest in that home and ordered the husband to convey his interest to the wife. The husband appeals, asserting that the court had no jurisdiction concerning that property in the absence of a claim of “special equity” by the wife’s petition. Niemann v. Niemann, 294 So. 2d 415 (Fla.App.4th, 1974), cert. disch. 312 So. 2d 733 (Fla.1975).
The parties specifically submitted to the court, for resolution and disposition, their respective claims of equities in real estate within the court’s jurisdiction, of which there was none except the home property. Testimony before the special master revealed that the wife contributed the bulk of the funds used for a down payment on the home in 1952. She contributed substantially to installing air conditioning and re-roofing the home. Since leaving the home in 1969, the husband regularly made the monthly mortgage payment of $52 but did not otherwise materially contribute to the support of his wife. There is evidence that, as part of a desired settlement of the economic issues 'between the parties, the husband sought monetary consideration from the wife for conveyance of his interest in the home property. In these circumstances, the court was authorized to exercise the powers which the parties invoked and to award the wife the home property. Walton v. Walton, 290 So. 2d 110 (Fla.App. 3d, 1974).
Affirmed.
BOYER, C. J., and MILLS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Niemann v. Niemann, 294 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)
- Norwood K. Walton v. Walton, 290 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- Niemann v. Niemann, 312 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 1975)