Wyche v. Wyche

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Wyche v. Wyche

935 So. 2d 579, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 12858, 2006 WL 2136498

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 2, 2006

DocketNo. 3D05-2621

StatusPublished

This text of 935 So. 2d 579 (Wyche v. Wyche) 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

Wyche v. Wyche, 935 So. 2d 579, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 12858, 2006 WL 2136498 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

John Anthony Wyche appeals an amended final judgment of dissolution of marriage. Because there is no trial transcript, our review is limited to any errors which may appear on the face of the amended final judgment. See Prymus v. Prymus, 753 So.2d 742 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Katowitz v. Katowitz, 684 So.2d 256, 257 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). We also take into account the clarification stated by the trial court in the hearing on the former husband’s motion for new trial and/or rehearing, for which hearing there was a transcript. We find no error in the trial court’s treatment of the marital home for equitable distribution purposes. Further, the trial court’s decision to award the former husband’s equity in the home to the former wife was within the trial court’s discretion, where the child support arrear-ages exceeded the former husband’s equity in the property.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

John Anthony Wyche appeals an amended final judgment of dissolution of marriage. Because there is no trial transcript, our review is limited to any errors which may appear on the face of the amended final judgment. See Prymus v. Prymus, 753 So.2d 742 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Katowitz v. Katowitz, 684 So.2d 256, 257 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). We also take into account the clarification stated by the trial court in the hearing on the former husband’s motion for new trial and/or rehearing, for which hearing there was a transcript. We find no error in the trial court’s treatment of the marital home for equitable distribution purposes. Further, the trial court’s decision to award the former husband’s equity in the home to the former wife was within the trial court’s discretion, where the child support arrear-ages exceeded the former husband’s equity in the property.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

935 So. 2d 579, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 12858, 2006 WL 2136498, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wyche-v-wyche-fladistctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack