Frank v. Frank

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Frank v. Frank

587 So. 2d 668, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 10374, 1991 WL 211419

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 23, 1991

DocketNo. 90-2984

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 587 So. 2d 668 (Frank v. Frank) 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

Frank v. Frank, 587 So. 2d 668, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 10374, 1991 WL 211419 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm as to the main appeal, but reverse as to the cross appeal.

Although we agree that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to modify the property settlement aspects of the parties final judgment of dissolution, we hold that the trial judge should have considered the sequestration and application of appellant’s interest in the former marital home to discharge the support obligation arrearages. Cimitier v. Cimitier, 579 So.2d 142 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). Upon remand, because the value of appellant’s interest in the former marital home appears to exceed the amount of the arrearages, the trial court should also consider whether to impose a trust on appel[669]*669lant’s excess valuation to insure the payment of future support obligations.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION.

HERSEY, GUNTHER and GARRETT, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm as to the main appeal, but reverse as to the cross appeal.

Although we agree that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to modify the property settlement aspects of the parties final judgment of dissolution, we hold that the trial judge should have considered the sequestration and application of appellant’s interest in the former marital home to discharge the support obligation arrearages. Cimitier v. Cimitier, 579 So.2d 142 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). Upon remand, because the value of appellant’s interest in the former marital home appears to exceed the amount of the arrearages, the trial court should also consider whether to impose a trust on appel[669]*669lant’s excess valuation to insure the payment of future support obligations.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION CONSISTENT WITH THIS OPINION.

HERSEY, GUNTHER and GARRETT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

587 So. 2d 668, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 10374, 1991 WL 211419, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frank-v-frank-fladistctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack