Odom v. Odom

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Odom v. Odom

568 So. 2d 988, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 8163, 1990 WL 159686

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 23, 1990

DocketNo. 90-1464

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 568 So. 2d 988 (Odom v. Odom) 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

Odom v. Odom, 568 So. 2d 988, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 8163, 1990 WL 159686 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The former husband appeals a non-final order denying his motion to dismiss the former wife’s petition for dissolution of marriage; he alleges that personal service of process in Georgia did not meet the requirements of Florida’s long-arm statute. § 48.193, Fla.Stat. (1985). We affirm.

By first seeking the affirmative relief of abatement, the husband submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court and was subject to all proceedings incident to the dissolution of the marriage. McKelvey v. McKelvey, 323 So.2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); see Zimmerman v. Weinberg, 557 So.2d 193 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Martin v. Ullman, 555 So.2d 1232 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Hatton v. Barnett Bank of Palm Beach County, 550 So.2d 65 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). The trial court could have resolved the associated issues, but committed no error in exercising jurisdiction over the agreed matters. Shammay v. Shammay, 491 So.2d 284 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (on motion for clarification); Arnstein v. Arnstein, 422 So.2d 1052 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The former husband appeals a non-final order denying his motion to dismiss the former wife’s petition for dissolution of marriage; he alleges that personal service of process in Georgia did not meet the requirements of Florida’s long-arm statute. § 48.193, Fla.Stat. (1985). We affirm.

By first seeking the affirmative relief of abatement, the husband submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court and was subject to all proceedings incident to the dissolution of the marriage. McKelvey v. McKelvey, 323 So.2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); see Zimmerman v. Weinberg, 557 So.2d 193 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Martin v. Ullman, 555 So.2d 1232 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Hatton v. Barnett Bank of Palm Beach County, 550 So.2d 65 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). The trial court could have resolved the associated issues, but committed no error in exercising jurisdiction over the agreed matters. Shammay v. Shammay, 491 So.2d 284 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (on motion for clarification); Arnstein v. Arnstein, 422 So.2d 1052 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

568 So. 2d 988, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 8163, 1990 WL 159686, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/odom-v-odom-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack