The Fifth District Court reversed today in Tuomey v. Tuomey, in so doing finding merit in two arguments raised by the former husband in his appeal of the final judgment of dissolution of marriage. First, the Court neglected to include the parties’ stipulation as to contact between a relative and the minor children, and the Fifth DCA found this to be error, citing Johnson v. Johnson, 663 So.2d 663, 665 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Next, the trial court was found to be in error for offsetting the Former Husband’s payment of expenses related to the former marital home pending its sale against its fair rental value without making any finding as to the amount of that rental value. However, the Former Husband’s claim of error to the effect that the lower court distributed unvested stock options as a marital asset was rejected, as the record reflected on careful review that only vested options were distributed.
1 comment:
This is very educational content and written well for a change. It's nice to see that some people still understand how to write a quality post.!
jual obat aborsi
Post a Comment