Carrigan v. Carrigan

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Carrigan v. Carrigan

283 So. 2d 574, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 6657

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 12, 1973

DocketNo. 73-379

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 283 So. 2d 574 (Carrigan v. Carrigan) 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

Carrigan v. Carrigan, 283 So. 2d 574, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 6657 (Fla. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying the husband’s petition for dissolution. Although the husband’s petition for dissolution asserted that the marriage was irretrievably broken and the wife’s answer admitted that the marriage was irretrievably broken, the trial court continued the matter in an effort to effect a reconciliation of the parties. To the extent that the trial judge sought to effectuate a reconciliation his action is commendable, however, the pleadings and evidence demonstrate that the marriage “in fact ended because of the basic unsuitability of the spouses for each other and their state of mind towards their relationship”. Riley v. Riley, Fla.App.1972, 271 So.2d 181; F.S. section 61.052(2)(a), F.S.A. The trial judge therefore erred in denying the petition for dissolution of marriage.

[575]*575Accordingly, the cause is reversed and remanded with directions to enter an order granting dissolution of the marriage'of the parties.

OWEN, C. J., and WALDEN and MAG-ER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order denying the husband’s petition for dissolution. Although the husband’s petition for dissolution asserted that the marriage was irretrievably broken and the wife’s answer admitted that the marriage was irretrievably broken, the trial court continued the matter in an effort to effect a reconciliation of the parties. To the extent that the trial judge sought to effectuate a reconciliation his action is commendable, however, the pleadings and evidence demonstrate that the marriage “in fact ended because of the basic unsuitability of the spouses for each other and their state of mind towards their relationship”. Riley v. Riley, Fla.App.1972, 271 So.2d 181; F.S. section 61.052(2)(a), F.S.A. The trial judge therefore erred in denying the petition for dissolution of marriage.

[575]*575Accordingly, the cause is reversed and remanded with directions to enter an order granting dissolution of the marriage'of the parties.

OWEN, C. J., and WALDEN and MAG-ER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 So. 2d 574, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 6657, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carrigan-v-carrigan-fladistctapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack