JEFFREY F. BERIN, AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM OF TONI SUE BOYD AND TAMMY JO BOYD, APPELLANT,
v.
OLVA SUE BOYD AND JIMMY K. BOYD, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the trial court's judgment finding that a former husband improperly used his minor children as unwitting instrumentalities in a scheme to retake real property from his former wife through harassment and intimidation.
A former husband's use of minor children as unwitting instrumentalities in a property scheme constitutes intolerable conduct that courts will not validate.
[1] A former husband's use of minor children as unwitting instrumentalities in a scheme to retake property from the former wife through harassment and intimidation constitute…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“to characterize the minor children as anything other than the unwitting instrumentalities of their father would put judicial imprimatur upon intolerable conduct and a patently unjust result”
The court explaining why it would not validate the former husband's use of the children in the property scheme.
A former husband conveyed real property to his former wife, who then conveyed it to their children, who immediately conveyed it back to the former hus…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Family Law cases and more on FLexlaw
GLICKSTEIN, Judge.
We have sua sponte considered this matter to be a plenary appeal from the final judgment entered by the trial court; the notice of appeal to be amended so to reflect; and the appendices to serve as the record on appeal.
The final judgment is affirmed as there is substantial, competent evidence to support it. The trial judge found from the evidence that the former husband plainly used the parties’ children as pawns in a scheme to retake from the former wife the real property which he had conveyed to her by having her convey the property to them and almost immediately thereafter having them convey the property to him. Through harassment and intimidation he obtained her name on a quit claim deed to the children who then executed another quit claim deed to the former husband. Although it is the guardian ad litem for two of the parties’ three children who is actively pursuing this appeal, not the former husband, there was no doubt in the trial judge’s mind nor in ours that to characterize the minor children as anything other than the unwitting instrumentalities of their father would put judicial imprimatur upon intolerable conduct and a patently unjust result simply to satisfy a claimed fear of the former husband that his former wife of many years would transfer her property to another man rather than to the parties’ children.
LETTS, C.J., and DELL, J., concur.