Enfield v. Enfield

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Enfield v. Enfield

479 So. 2d 155, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2524, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16684

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 12, 1985

DocketNos. 83-1938, 84-2080

StatusPublished

This text of 479 So. 2d 155 (Enfield v. Enfield) 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

Enfield v. Enfield, 479 So. 2d 155, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2524, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16684 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Paragraph L of the Amended Final Judgment Dissolving Marriage provides, inter alia, that the parties shall own the marital home as tenants in common; that the wife shall for a prescribed period have exclusive use and possession of the home and be responsible to make the mortgage and maintenance payments thereon; and that “[u]pon the ultimate sale of the marital home the wife shall be entitled from the proceeds thereof to credit for one half of all mortgage payments and maintenance payments made by her.” The husband concedes that consistent with the prevailing law on the subject, see, e.g., Price v. Price, 389 So.2d 666 (Fla.3d DCA 1980), the intent of the judgment is that this credit is to be assessed against the husband’s share in the proceeds of the sale of the house. With that clarification, the judgment is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Paragraph L of the Amended Final Judgment Dissolving Marriage provides, inter alia, that the parties shall own the marital home as tenants in common; that the wife shall for a prescribed period have exclusive use and possession of the home and be responsible to make the mortgage and maintenance payments thereon; and that “[u]pon the ultimate sale of the marital home the wife shall be entitled from the proceeds thereof to credit for one half of all mortgage payments and maintenance payments made by her.” The husband concedes that consistent with the prevailing law on the subject, see, e.g., Price v. Price, 389 So.2d 666 (Fla.3d DCA 1980), the intent of the judgment is that this credit is to be assessed against the husband’s share in the proceeds of the sale of the house. With that clarification, the judgment is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

479 So. 2d 155, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2524, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/enfield-v-enfield-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack