Ballato v. Pinnix-Ballato

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ballato v. Pinnix-Ballato

829 So. 2d 276, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14287, 2002 WL 31202144

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 4, 2002

DocketNo. 2D01-5747

StatusPublished

This text of 829 So. 2d 276 (Ballato v. Pinnix-Ballato) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ballato v. Pinnix-Ballato, 829 So. 2d 276, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14287, 2002 WL 31202144 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

STRINGER, Judge.

Anthony James Ballato (the Husband) seeks review of the final judgment of dissolution of his marriage to Robin Jo Pinnix Ballato (the Wife). The Husband raises two challenges to the final judgment: (1) that the trial court erred in awarding the Wife $10,000 lump sum alimony and (2) that the trial court erred in finding that the parties’ home was a marital asset. Because the Wife waived her claim for alimony at the final hearing, we reverse the award of lump sum alimony. We affirm the trial court’s finding that the parties’ home was a marital asset without comment.

Although the Wife’s petition for dissolution contained a request for lump sum alimony, the Wife expressly waived any claim for alimony at the beginning of the final hearing. Regardless, the trial court awarded the Wife $10,000 lump sum alimony for support that was separate from the equitable distribution scheme. Because neither party presented evidence or argument regarding alimony at the hearing, the trial court erred in awarding alimony. Hu v. Hu, 432 So.2d 1389 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Herring v. Herring, 666 So.2d 927 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). We therefore reverse the trial court’s lump sum alimony award but otherwise affirm the final judgment of dissolution of marriage.

Reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded.

ALTENBERND and WHATLEY, JJ., Concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

STRINGER, Judge.

Anthony James Ballato (the Husband) seeks review of the final judgment of dissolution of his marriage to Robin Jo Pinnix Ballato (the Wife). The Husband raises two challenges to the final judgment: (1) that the trial court erred in awarding the Wife $10,000 lump sum alimony and (2) that the trial court erred in finding that the parties’ home was a marital asset. Because the Wife waived her claim for alimony at the final hearing, we reverse the award of lump sum alimony. We affirm the trial court’s finding that the parties’ home was a marital asset without comment.

Although the Wife’s petition for dissolution contained a request for lump sum alimony, the Wife expressly waived any claim for alimony at the beginning of the final hearing. Regardless, the trial court awarded the Wife $10,000 lump sum alimony for support that was separate from the equitable distribution scheme. Because neither party presented evidence or argument regarding alimony at the hearing, the trial court erred in awarding alimony. Hu v. Hu, 432 So.2d 1389 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Herring v. Herring, 666 So.2d 927 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). We therefore reverse the trial court’s lump sum alimony award but otherwise affirm the final judgment of dissolution of marriage.

Reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded.

ALTENBERND and WHATLEY, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

829 So. 2d 276, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14287, 2002 WL 31202144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ballato-v-pinnix-ballato-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack