Patterson v. Patterson

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Patterson v. Patterson

606 So. 2d 767, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11243, 1992 WL 308846

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 28, 1992·No. No. 91-2806·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm in all respects, except we reverse the trial court’s equitable distribution of the husband’s pension plan. The trial court erred in concluding that the husband’s entire pension plan was marital property since the husband established his pension plan five years before the parties married. Accordingly, the trial court must recalculate the portion of the pension plan properly deemed to be marital property. Griffiths v. Griffiths, 563 So.2d 773 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.

DOWNEY, GUNTHER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm in all respects, except we reverse the trial court’s equitable distribution of the husband’s pension plan. The trial court erred in concluding that the husband’s entire pension plan was marital property since the husband established his pension plan five years before the parties married. Accordingly, the trial court must recalculate the portion of the pension plan properly deemed to be marital property. Griffiths v. Griffiths, 563 So.2d 773 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.

DOWNEY, GUNTHER and POLEN, JJ., concur.

Patterson v. Patterson, 606 So. 2d 767, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11243, 1992 WL 308846 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

606 So. 2d 767 (Patterson v. Patterson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related