Rustom v. Sparling
685 So. 2d 90, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 55, 1997 WL 1570
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 2, 1997·No. No. 96-0769·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
We reverse and remand that portion of the final judgment entered by the trial court, which finds certain notes and the mortgage prepared by the husband in favor of his father, a non-party, to be invalid. The trial court may not adjudicate the rights of a non-party.
We affirm the final judgment in all other respects, and specifically affirm that portion ordering the husband to clear' the title of the subject property or to bear the fees and costs in the event the wife is required to clear the title.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Rustom v. Sparling, 685 So. 2d 90, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 55, 1997 WL 1570 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).
685 So. 2d 90 (Rustom v. Sparling) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. Huber
137 So. 3d 562 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)
Beaumont v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
81 So. 3d 553 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)
Tieu Quoc Tran v. Fragnoli
834 So. 2d 939 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)