Jalileyan v. Jalileyan

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jalileyan v. Jalileyan

4 So. 3d 1289, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2948, 2009 WL 838258

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 1, 2009

Docket4D07-3882

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 4 So. 3d 1289 (Jalileyan v. Jalileyan) 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

Jalileyan v. Jalileyan, 4 So. 3d 1289, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2948, 2009 WL 838258 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

TAYLOR, J.

Mohssen Jalileyan, the former husband, appeals the trial court’s Final Judgment for Dissolution of Marriage, asserting that the trial court erred in distributing the marital assets unequally and in taking into account unenforceable provisions of post-nuptial agreements when considering equitable distribution. We reverse, because the final judgment shows that the trial court made an unequal distribution of the marital assets, mainly by awarding the marital residence to the former wife, yet failed to make factual findings to explain or justify the disproportionate equitable distribution. See § 61.075(3), Fla. Stat. (requiring that the trial court’s distribution of marital assets and marital liabilities be supported by “factual findings in the judgment or order based on competent substantial evidence ... ”). On remand, the trial court must redistribute the assets or make factual findings necessary to support an unequal distribution. See Montalvo v. Montalvo, 949 So.2d 350, 351 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

Reversed and Remanded.

STEVENSON and MAY, JJ., concur.

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

TAYLOR, J.

Mohssen Jalileyan, the former husband, appeals the trial court’s Final Judgment for Dissolution of Marriage, asserting that the trial court erred in distributing the marital assets unequally and in taking into account unenforceable provisions of post-nuptial agreements when considering equitable distribution. We reverse, because the final judgment shows that the trial court made an unequal distribution of the marital assets, mainly by awarding the marital residence to the former wife, yet failed to make factual findings to explain or justify the disproportionate equitable distribution. See § 61.075(3), Fla. Stat. (requiring that the trial court’s distribution of marital assets and marital liabilities be supported by “factual findings in the judgment or order based on competent substantial evidence ... ”). On remand, the trial court must redistribute the assets or make factual findings necessary to support an unequal distribution. See Montalvo v. Montalvo, 949 So.2d 350, 351 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

Reversed and Remanded.

STEVENSON and MAY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 So. 3d 1289, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2948, 2009 WL 838258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jalileyan-v-jalileyan-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack