Register v. Register

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Register v. Register

617 So. 2d 820, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4995, 1993 WL 136088

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 3, 1993

DocketNo. 91-2700

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 617 So. 2d 820 (Register v. Register) 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

Register v. Register, 617 So. 2d 820, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4995, 1993 WL 136088 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Sidney W. Register appeals from an order of contempt. Appellant conceded that he owed his former wife an arrearage in the amount of $65,664.17 under a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, but disputes a finding of the trial court that he owed an additional $96,679.85 stemming from the sale of the marital home. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s determination that appellant had agreed to pay this amount under a stipulation and agreement that was incorporated into the final judgment of dissolution. However, we agree with appellant that he cannot be jailed for contempt for his failure to pay a debt in the nature of a property settlement. See, e.g., Marks v. Marks, 457 So.2d 1137 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to subtract from the amount that appellant must pay to purge himself of contempt any sums that represent payments in furtherance of equitable distribution of property.

ALLEN, WOLF and KAHN, JJ„ concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Sidney W. Register appeals from an order of contempt. Appellant conceded that he owed his former wife an arrearage in the amount of $65,664.17 under a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, but disputes a finding of the trial court that he owed an additional $96,679.85 stemming from the sale of the marital home. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s determination that appellant had agreed to pay this amount under a stipulation and agreement that was incorporated into the final judgment of dissolution. However, we agree with appellant that he cannot be jailed for contempt for his failure to pay a debt in the nature of a property settlement. See, e.g., Marks v. Marks, 457 So.2d 1137 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to subtract from the amount that appellant must pay to purge himself of contempt any sums that represent payments in furtherance of equitable distribution of property.

ALLEN, WOLF and KAHN, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

617 So. 2d 820, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4995, 1993 WL 136088, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/register-v-register-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack