VICTOR ZIMMERMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
FRED E. GARDNER, RAMONA D. BOROVIC-KA, CENTRAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE, ET AL., APPELLEES
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.
A divorced woman living with her ex-husband's elderly aunt, who pays for food and care, does not qualify as the head of a family for homestead exemption purposes.
Ramona Borovicka, a divorced woman, resides in her home with her former husband's elderly aunt, whom she cares for. Her adult son also stays with them…
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 Florida Constitution Article X, Section 4 cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Victor Zimmerman, a judgment creditor, appeals from an order of the trial court which determined that a certain residence was the exempt homestead of his judgment debtor, Ramona D. Borovicka. The determinative issue is whether Mrs. Borovicka qualified as “head of a family” within the meaning of Article X, Section 4 of the Florida Constitution. We find that she did not and reverse.
The facts were stipulated in the trial court and are not in dispute. Mrs. Borovic-ka is divorced and resides in her residence with the aunt of her former husband. She still regards the aunt as a relative. Her 31 year old son also stays with them from time to time, but his occasional presence is not significant in the determination of this case. Mrs. Borovicka’s claim that she is the head of a family is based upon the fact that she maintains the residence both for herself and her “aunt” who is elderly and unable to care for herself. Mrs. Borovicka is a nurse and takes care of her “aunt,” who pays no rent but does pay for her food and care.
We conclude that these facts fail to establish that Mrs. Borovicka is the head of a family. She is to be commended for providing care to an elderly person, but she has no legal or moral obligation to care for her former husband’s aunt and she can terminate the relationship at any time she desires. In re Estate of Kionka, 113 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
ALDERMAN, C. J., and CROSS and MOORE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. The Honorable James R. Stewart, 390 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…whether the relationship commenced in late 1967 or early 1968. To establish a “family in fact,” appellant was required to prove he had a moral obligation to support and care for the woman and her child with whom he was living. Zimmerman v. Gardner, 355 So. 2d 157 (Fla.4th DCA 1978); In re Kionka’s Estate, 113 So. 2d 603 (Fla.2d DCA 1959), affirmed 121 So. 2d 644 (Fla.1960). We recognize that dicta in several cases has referred to the “family in fact,” defined as “a continuing communal living by at least two…
Authorities Cited
- In re Est. of Anna Z. Kionka v. Hebbard, 113 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959)