Lovejoy v. Lovejoy

Supreme Court of Florida

Lovejoy v. Lovejoy

36 So. 2d 192, 160 Fla. 652, 1948 Fla. LEXIS 820

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedJune 29, 1948

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 36 So. 2d 192 (Lovejoy v. Lovejoy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lovejoy v. Lovejoy, 36 So. 2d 192, 160 Fla. 652, 1948 Fla. LEXIS 820 (Fla. 1948).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM:

It is our conclusion that the chancellor did not err in finding the equities to be with the appellee and against the appellant and that the grounds alleged for divorce had been proven. See Heath v. Heath, 103 Fla. 1071, 138 So. 796; McMillan v. McMillan, 120 Fla. 209, 162 So. 524. It is also our conclusion that with respect to certain property purchased entirely with the husband’s funds and placed in the joint names of both husband and wife, the presumption of a gift to the wife has been overcome by conclusive evidence within the purview of Kollar v. Kollar, 155 Fla. 705, 21 So. (2nd) 356, and that accordingly the case, on this point, is ruled by Hargett v. Hargett, 156 Fla. 730, 24 So. (2nd) 305.

The decree appealed from is affirmed.

TERRELL, CHAPMAN, ADAMS, SEBRING,. and BARNS, J.J., concur. THOMAS, C. J., concurs in part and dissents in part. HOBSON, J., not participating.

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

PER CURIAM:

It is our conclusion that the chancellor did not err in finding the equities to be with the appellee and against the appellant and that the grounds alleged for divorce had been proven. See Heath v. Heath, 103 Fla. 1071, 138 So. 796; McMillan v. McMillan, 120 Fla. 209, 162 So. 524. It is also our conclusion that with respect to certain property purchased entirely with the husband’s funds and placed in the joint names of both husband and wife, the presumption of a gift to the wife has been overcome by conclusive evidence within the purview of Kollar v. Kollar, 155 Fla. 705, 21 So. (2nd) 356, and that accordingly the case, on this point, is ruled by Hargett v. Hargett, 156 Fla. 730, 24 So. (2nd) 305.

The decree appealed from is affirmed.

TERRELL, CHAPMAN, ADAMS, SEBRING,. and BARNS, J.J., concur. THOMAS, C. J., concurs in part and dissents in part. HOBSON, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 So. 2d 192, 160 Fla. 652, 1948 Fla. LEXIS 820, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lovejoy-v-lovejoy-fla-1948.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack