Juan Gamez Garcia v. Maria D. Ruiz Moreno

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Juan Gamez Garcia v. Maria D. Ruiz Moreno

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 14, 2024

Docket2023-0938

StatusPublished

This text of Juan Gamez Garcia v. Maria D. Ruiz Moreno (Juan Gamez Garcia v. Maria D. Ruiz Moreno) 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

Juan Gamez Garcia v. Maria D. Ruiz Moreno, (Fla. Ct. App. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

JUAN GAMEZ GARCIA, Appellant,

v.

MARIA D. RUIZ MORENO, Appellee.

No. 4D2023-0938

[February 14, 2024]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Indian River County; Cynthia L. Cox, Judge; L.T. Case No. 312022DR000639.

Charles E. Jarrell of Charles E. Jarrell, P.A., Vero Beach, for appellant.

No answer brief filed for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This case involves the divorce of parties with limited means, whose net assets totaled approximately $73,000. The parties’ most significant asset was a mobile home and lot valued at $66,000.

The final judgment awarded the former wife $275 per month in permanent alimony; the judgment also awarded the former wife the entirety of the mobile home as lump sum alimony, finding that the former husband “agree[d]” to such a disposition.

On appeal, the former husband does not attack the award of permanent alimony. Rather, he takes issue with the award of the mobile home, contending that the record does not support the court’s finding that he “agree[d]” to such a disposition of the property.

At trial, the former husband represented himself. Examination of the Zoom trial transcript reveals that he did not unconditionally agree that his wife should receive title to the mobile home and lot—he made that offer on the condition that he had no other financial obligation to the former wife. At one point at the trial, when faced with the prospect of certain financial obligations, the former husband said, “in that case I will ask for the mobile home to be sold and then split everything in half.”

We reverse the award of the mobile home and lot to the former wife. On remand, the trial court should consider how the disposition of that property should be achieved in the absence of any agreement by the former husband. To do justice between the parties, the trial court may also reconsider or adjust the award of alimony.

Reversed and remanded.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., GROSS and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

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

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

JUAN GAMEZ GARCIA, Appellant,

v.

MARIA D. RUIZ MORENO, Appellee.

No. 4D2023-0938

[February 14, 2024]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Indian River County; Cynthia L. Cox, Judge; L.T. Case No. 312022DR000639.

Charles E. Jarrell of Charles E. Jarrell, P.A., Vero Beach, for appellant.

No answer brief filed for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This case involves the divorce of parties with limited means, whose net assets totaled approximately $73,000. The parties’ most significant asset was a mobile home and lot valued at $66,000.

The final judgment awarded the former wife $275 per month in permanent alimony; the judgment also awarded the former wife the entirety of the mobile home as lump sum alimony, finding that the former husband “agree[d]” to such a disposition.

On appeal, the former husband does not attack the award of permanent alimony. Rather, he takes issue with the award of the mobile home, contending that the record does not support the court’s finding that he “agree[d]” to such a disposition of the property.

At trial, the former husband represented himself. Examination of the Zoom trial transcript reveals that he did not unconditionally agree that his wife should receive title to the mobile home and lot—he made that offer on the condition that he had no other financial obligation to the former wife. At one point at the trial, when faced with the prospect of certain financial obligations, the former husband said, “in that case I will ask for the mobile home to be sold and then split everything in half.”

We reverse the award of the mobile home and lot to the former wife. On remand, the trial court should consider how the disposition of that property should be achieved in the absence of any agreement by the former husband. To do justice between the parties, the trial court may also reconsider or adjust the award of alimony.

Reversed and remanded.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., GROSS and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Juan Gamez Garcia v. Maria D. Ruiz Moreno, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/juan-gamez-garcia-v-maria-d-ruiz-moreno-fladistctapp-2024.