Guralnick v. Guralnick

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Guralnick v. Guralnick

645 So. 2d 1097, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11491, 1994 WL 665729

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 30, 1994

DocketNo. 93-2475

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 645 So. 2d 1097 (Guralnick v. Guralnick) 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

Guralnick v. Guralnick, 645 So. 2d 1097, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11491, 1994 WL 665729 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Husband appeals the judgment dissolving his marriage. We affirm all aspects of the judgment except that provision of the final judgment which requires husband to provide medical insurance for his former wife. While it was proper for the court to require medical insurance, there must be a monetary limitation on the obligation. See Ginsburg v. Ginsburg, 610 So.2d 655, 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) and cases cited therein. See also, Gay v. Gay, 573 So.2d 180, 181 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Here there was no limitation.

We therefore reverse that aspect of the judgment and remand for the trial court to [1098]*1098set a limitation on the maximum cost of such insurance.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., and GROSS, ROBERT M., Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Husband appeals the judgment dissolving his marriage. We affirm all aspects of the judgment except that provision of the final judgment which requires husband to provide medical insurance for his former wife. While it was proper for the court to require medical insurance, there must be a monetary limitation on the obligation. See Ginsburg v. Ginsburg, 610 So.2d 655, 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) and cases cited therein. See also, Gay v. Gay, 573 So.2d 180, 181 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Here there was no limitation.

We therefore reverse that aspect of the judgment and remand for the trial court to [1098]*1098set a limitation on the maximum cost of such insurance.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., and GROSS, ROBERT M., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

645 So. 2d 1097, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11491, 1994 WL 665729, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/guralnick-v-guralnick-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack