Keeton v. Keeton

807 So. 2d 186, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1741, 2002 WL 232801
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 19, 2002
DocketNo. 1D00-4575
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 807 So. 2d 186 (Keeton v. Keeton) 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
Keeton v. Keeton, 807 So. 2d 186, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1741, 2002 WL 232801 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals the trial court’s Order Denying Petition to Register and Enforce Foreign Decree. In her Petition, Appellant seeks to enforce a property settlement agreement incorporated into the divorce decree between Appellant and Ap-pellee/Decedent pursuant to the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (“UIFSA”), codified in Chapter 88, Florida Statutes. We affirm the trial court’s finding that the property settlement agreement is enforceable in Florida. We also affirm the trial court’s finding that pursuant to section 88.6041, Florida Statutes, Kentucky law controls whether Appellee/Decedent’s maintenance obligation survives his death. However, we reverse, holding that the trial court misapplied Kentucky law.

The trial court erroneously found that the two cases providing precedent in Kentucky on this issue were inconsistent. We find John v. John, 893 S.W.2d 373 (Ky.App.1995), and Clark v. Clark, 601 S.W.2d 614 (Ky.App.1980), are distinguishable, but not conflicting. As in John, the property settlement agreement in this case was an agreed-to contract between the [187]*187parties, and was not required to expressly address the termination of maintenance payments upon the obligor’s death pursuant to KRS 403.250(3). Further, the parties included in their agreement that it “shall be binding on their successors, heirs and assigns.” Therefore, we hold that the obligation contained in the agreement survives Appellee/Decedent’s death.

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings in accordance with section 88.6071(3), Florida Statutes (2000).

BOOTH, WEBSTER and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Blitz v. Florida Department of Revenue
898 So. 2d 121 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
807 So. 2d 186, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1741, 2002 WL 232801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keeton-v-keeton-fladistctapp-2002.