IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF ROSWELL GARDNER CHENEY, APPELLANT,
v.
MARGARET JOAN SCOTT BLAKEY CHENEY, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 1984-11-08
No. 83-1708
COBB, C.J., and FRANK D. UP-CHURCH, J., concur.
460 So. 2d 914 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the transfer of property from husband to wife was a transaction for consideration, not a gift, and thus the husband was not entitled to a special equity.


Facts & Procedural History

The husband conveyed his interest in real property to the wife so she could obtain a loan to pay debts and improve the property, as the bank would not…

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.


Opinion of the Court
DAUKSCH, Judge.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment in a marriage dissolution case. The principal point on appeal involves a claimed special equity in real property.

It was clearly established by the evidence that the husband conveyed by deed his interest in the subject real property in order for the wife to obtain a loan from a bank to pay various debts of the parties and make improvements on the property. The bank would not loan the money to the husband but only to the wife because of the husband’s poor credit rating. Only the wife was obligated on the mortgage note and this obligation was part of the consideration she paid for the husband’s interest in the property.

Husband claims the principles enunciated , in Ball v. Ball, 335 So. 2d 5 (Fla.1976) apply here and since he got the property by inheritance he should be deemed the equitable owner of the property even though the legal title is in her name. He says she must prove a gift to her was intended since he in essence provided all the consideration (by inheritance) for the property when it was acquired. Good argument, but it misses the point. This was not a gift situation at all. It was a transfer for consideration. The conveyance was made to facilitate the obtaining of the mortgage loan. There was consideration for the transaction: the wife incurred a debt, the bank obtained an interest in the property, the husband was relieved of some debt and the property was improved.

This is not a Ball special equity situation, it is a business deal.

AFFIRMED.

COBB, C.J., and FRANK D. UP-CHURCH, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Wakefield v. Wakefield, 796 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Cheney v. Cheney, 460 So. 2d 914 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). KLEIN, SHAHOOD and GROSS, JJ., concur.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw