Ingrahm v. Ingrahm

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ingrahm v. Ingrahm

711 So. 2d 1346, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6650, 1998 WL 307574

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 12, 1998

DocketNo. 97-3393

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 711 So. 2d 1346 (Ingrahm v. Ingrahm) 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

Ingrahm v. Ingrahm, 711 So. 2d 1346, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6650, 1998 WL 307574 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

COBB, Judge.

We reverse the order of the Seminole County Circuit Court denying the appellant’s motion to transfer venue over the appellee’s petition for modification of alimony from Seminole to Volusia County. Prior to the appellee’s filing of his petition, appellant, as the party to whom the alimony is owed, filed a complaint for enforcement of final judgment of dissolution in the Circuit Court for Volusia County, her county of residence. See § 61.17, Fla. Stat.; Bryant v. Bryant, 566 So.2d 65 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). Appellee served an answer. Once the enforcement proceeding was undertaken in an appropriate venue, venue was improper in a different county over the subsequently filed petition to modify the same decree which was the subject of the enforcement proceedings. See Bailey v. Malone, 389 So.2d 348 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

GOSHORN and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

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

COBB, Judge.

We reverse the order of the Seminole County Circuit Court denying the appellant’s motion to transfer venue over the appellee’s petition for modification of alimony from Seminole to Volusia County. Prior to the appellee’s filing of his petition, appellant, as the party to whom the alimony is owed, filed a complaint for enforcement of final judgment of dissolution in the Circuit Court for Volusia County, her county of residence. See § 61.17, Fla. Stat.; Bryant v. Bryant, 566 So.2d 65 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). Appellee served an answer. Once the enforcement proceeding was undertaken in an appropriate venue, venue was improper in a different county over the subsequently filed petition to modify the same decree which was the subject of the enforcement proceedings. See Bailey v. Malone, 389 So.2d 348 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

GOSHORN and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

711 So. 2d 1346, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6650, 1998 WL 307574, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ingrahm-v-ingrahm-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack