Buscemi v. Buscemi

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Buscemi v. Buscemi

610 So. 2d 674, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12585, 1992 WL 371541

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 18, 1992

DocketNo. 92-00133

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 610 So. 2d 674 (Buscemi v. Buscemi) 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

Buscemi v. Buscemi, 610 So. 2d 674, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12585, 1992 WL 371541 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

CAMPBELL, Judge.

In this appeal, appellant/wife, Virginia Lee Buscemi, challenges a final judgment of dissolution of marriage arguing that the trial court erred in setting the amount of permanent periodic alimony awarded wife, in ordering that the alimony award would automatically terminate if wife entered into a “full-time marital-type relationship with another person,” and in the characterization and manner of distribution of marital and non-marital assets. Appellee/cross-ap-pellant/husband, Daniel S. Buscemi, appeals the award of attorney’s fees to wife.

We find reversible error only in the provision that the alimony award to wife would automatically terminate upon the event wife entered into a “full-time marital-type relationship with another person” and direct that on remand that provision be stricken. While we believe the trial judge may have mistakenly characterized some of wife’s non-marital assets as marital assets, those assets were awarded to wife, and we conclude that a reversal to merely correct that mischaracterization would not properly result in any different distribution of assets between the parties. Our conclusion is arrived at and supported by the particular circumstances of this case and the manner in which the trial judge effected what we determine to be an equitable distribution of assets between the parties.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded.

RYDER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., concur.

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

CAMPBELL, Judge.

In this appeal, appellant/wife, Virginia Lee Buscemi, challenges a final judgment of dissolution of marriage arguing that the trial court erred in setting the amount of permanent periodic alimony awarded wife, in ordering that the alimony award would automatically terminate if wife entered into a “full-time marital-type relationship with another person,” and in the characterization and manner of distribution of marital and non-marital assets. Appellee/cross-ap-pellant/husband, Daniel S. Buscemi, appeals the award of attorney’s fees to wife.

We find reversible error only in the provision that the alimony award to wife would automatically terminate upon the event wife entered into a “full-time marital-type relationship with another person” and direct that on remand that provision be stricken. While we believe the trial judge may have mistakenly characterized some of wife’s non-marital assets as marital assets, those assets were awarded to wife, and we conclude that a reversal to merely correct that mischaracterization would not properly result in any different distribution of assets between the parties. Our conclusion is arrived at and supported by the particular circumstances of this case and the manner in which the trial judge effected what we determine to be an equitable distribution of assets between the parties.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded.

RYDER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

610 So. 2d 674, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12585, 1992 WL 371541, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/buscemi-v-buscemi-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack