Kunst v. Kunst
551 So. 2d 522, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2134, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5027, 1989 WL 104056
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 5, 1989·No. No. 88-2226·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
The trial court’s order determining custody was supported by substantial, competent evidence. Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm. Richardson v. Richardson, 442 So.2d 1005 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). This affirmance is without prejudice to either party’s right to return to the trial court to seek partition of the jointly owned real property, or to have the trial court determine each party’s financial responsibility for expenses and entitlement to profits relating to that property.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kunst v. Kunst, 551 So. 2d 522, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2134, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5027, 1989 WL 104056 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).
551 So. 2d 522 (Kunst v. Kunst) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Brago v. Brago
604 So. 2d 866 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Underwood v. DEPT. OF HEALTH & REHAB. SERV.
551 So. 2d 522 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)