Barbare v. Napier

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Barbare v. Napier

645 So. 2d 146, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11116, 1994 WL 637752

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 16, 1994·No. No. 94-2086·Published

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

We agree with the trial court that the movement of the ex-wife’s new husband into the jointly-owned former marital residence effected an ouster of the ex-husband so as to justify a credit for one-half the rental value of the home thereafter as an offset to the one given her because she made all the mortgage payments. In our view, Finn v. Finn, 464 So.2d 1266 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), which so indicates, has not been overruled by subsequent supreme court decisions on the issue. See Kelly v. Kelly, 583 So.2d 667 (Fla.1991); Barrow v. Barrow, 527 So.2d 1373 (Fla.1988). See also Goolsby v. Wiley, 547 So.2d 227 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (distinguishing Finn).

Affirmed.

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

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

We agree with the trial court that the movement of the ex-wife’s new husband into the jointly-owned former marital residence effected an ouster of the ex-husband so as to justify a credit for one-half the rental value of the home thereafter as an offset to the one given her because she made all the mortgage payments. In our view, Finn v. Finn, 464 So.2d 1266 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), which so indicates, has not been overruled by subsequent supreme court decisions on the issue. See Kelly v. Kelly, 583 So.2d 667 (Fla.1991); Barrow v. Barrow, 527 So.2d 1373 (Fla.1988). See also Goolsby v. Wiley, 547 So.2d 227 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989) (distinguishing Finn).

Affirmed.

Barbare v. Napier, 645 So. 2d 146, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11116, 1994 WL 637752 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

645 So. 2d 146 (Barbare v. Napier) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related