Hubbard v. Hubbard

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hubbard v. Hubbard

486 So. 2d 28, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 763, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7097

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 1, 1986

DocketNo. 85-2300

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 486 So. 2d 28 (Hubbard v. Hubbard) 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

Hubbard v. Hubbard, 486 So. 2d 28, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 763, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7097 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Finding that the parties’ settlement agreement, incorporated within the Final Judgment [of] Dissolution of Marriage, provided for reduction of alimony on the occurrence of the former wife’s “remarriage,” (a term specifically defined to include the wife’s cohabitation), we affirm the post-judgment order pertaining to ar-rearages. See Mendel v. Mendel, 257 So.2d 293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972); Gale v. Rose, 455 So.2d 476 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Adams v. Adams, 423 So.2d 596, 598 n. 6 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); see also Pusey v. Pusey, 386 So.2d 269 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Schwebke v. Schwebke, 347 So.2d 645 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Appellant’s remaining point lacks merit.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Finding that the parties’ settlement agreement, incorporated within the Final Judgment [of] Dissolution of Marriage, provided for reduction of alimony on the occurrence of the former wife’s “remarriage,” (a term specifically defined to include the wife’s cohabitation), we affirm the post-judgment order pertaining to ar-rearages. See Mendel v. Mendel, 257 So.2d 293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972); Gale v. Rose, 455 So.2d 476 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Adams v. Adams, 423 So.2d 596, 598 n. 6 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); see also Pusey v. Pusey, 386 So.2d 269 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Schwebke v. Schwebke, 347 So.2d 645 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Appellant’s remaining point lacks merit.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

486 So. 2d 28, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 763, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7097, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hubbard-v-hubbard-fladistctapp-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack