Mack v. Mack

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mack v. Mack

550 So. 2d 42, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1981, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4695, 1989 WL 97612

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 22, 1989

DocketNo. 88-1751

StatusPublished

This text of 550 So. 2d 42 (Mack v. Mack) 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

Mack v. Mack, 550 So. 2d 42, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1981, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4695, 1989 WL 97612 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

As one of her issues in this appeal, the former wife contends that the trial court closed its eyes to the husband’s pension fund, which accumulated during the course of the thirty-year marriage, as marital property subject to equitable distribution, citing Diffenderfer v. Diffenderfer, 491 So.2d 265 (Fla.1986). Indeed the final judgment is silent on the subject. We, accordingly, remand the case to the trial court with instructions to treat the husband’s retirement benefits as marital property and make such distribution as is necessary to do equity and justice between the parties. No abuse of discretion is shown, however, in the alimony award.

Remanded for further proceedings.

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

PER CURIAM.

As one of her issues in this appeal, the former wife contends that the trial court closed its eyes to the husband’s pension fund, which accumulated during the course of the thirty-year marriage, as marital property subject to equitable distribution, citing Diffenderfer v. Diffenderfer, 491 So.2d 265 (Fla.1986). Indeed the final judgment is silent on the subject. We, accordingly, remand the case to the trial court with instructions to treat the husband’s retirement benefits as marital property and make such distribution as is necessary to do equity and justice between the parties. No abuse of discretion is shown, however, in the alimony award.

Remanded for further proceedings.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

550 So. 2d 42, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1981, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 4695, 1989 WL 97612, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mack-v-mack-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack