Hilsman v. Hilsman
This text of 438 So. 2d 880 (Hilsman v. Hilsman) 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.
Opinion
Based on the authority of Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980), we affirm the final judgment of dissolution in all respects except for the provision which requires the former husband to maintain life insurance for the benefit of each child “during the child’s minority and through college.” (Emphasis supplied). On remand, we direct the trial court to delete the phrase, “and through college.” See Blum v. Blum, 382 So.2d 52 (Fla.3d DCA 1980); Kern v. Kern, 360 So.2d 482 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978).
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
438 So. 2d 880, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 24476, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hilsman-v-hilsman-fladistctapp-1983.