Sullivan v. Sullivan

31 So. 3d 191, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 3337, 2009 WL 4827399
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 17, 2010
Docket4D08-1087
StatusPublished

This text of 31 So. 3d 191 (Sullivan v. Sullivan) 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
Sullivan v. Sullivan, 31 So. 3d 191, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 3337, 2009 WL 4827399 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinions

FARMER, J.

In this dissolution of marriage action, where the marital assets exceed $26 million, we affirm on all issues except as to the amount of an equalization payment prescribed in the final judgment.

While the action was pending, each party received advances against equitable distribution: he, $1,705,504; she, $1,603,610. The parties agree that there is an error in factoring the advances into the final distribution because the total marital assets were fully accounted for in the distribution — that she should not also have been given a credit for the difference in the amounts of the advances. They disagree as to the solution. He argues that the credit should simply be eliminated. She argues that the advances should be taken out of the calculation.

Because the advances were in all events part of the marital estate, the court correctly accounted for them in the equalization process. We agree with him that the credit of $101,894 should be eliminated. On remand, the court shall reduce the equalization payment from $1,450,006 to $1,348,112.

In all other respects, the final judgment is affirmed.

WARNER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

PER CURIAM.

The motion for rehearing is denied.

[192]*192FARMER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

WARNER, J., dissents with opinion.

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

Related

Morris v. Morris
724 P.2d 527 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1986)
Mathers v. Brown
21 So. 3d 834 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2009)
Catalfumo v. Catalfumo
704 So. 2d 1095 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
31 So. 3d 191, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 3337, 2009 WL 4827399, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sullivan-v-sullivan-fladistctapp-2010.