WILLIAM L. BACON, APPELLANT,
v.
MARY E. BACON, APPELLEE
WILLIAM L. BACON, APPELLANT,
MARY E. BACON, APPELLEE
507 So. 2d 1153
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1987)
Opinion of the Court
[*1154] PER CURIAM.
The trial court reformed the parties’ property settlement agreement to reflect their true intent. We reject appellant’s contention that Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540 precluded the trial court from reforming the agreement. See Gobelman v. Gobelman, 303 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974), cert. denied, 316 So. 2d 561 (1975); see also Sheffield v. Barry, 153 Fla. 144, 14 So. 2d 417 (1943); Dagnino v. Home Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 183 So. 2d 846, 849 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 188 So. 2d 821 (Fla.1966). Appellant’s remaining point lacks merit. Accordingly, we affirm.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Sheffield v. Cora Wittstock Barry, 153 Fla. 144 (Fla. 1943)
- Concord Shopping Ctr. v. Litowitz, 188 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1966)
- Edgar v. Quality Roofing Tile Co., 188 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1966)
- State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Fowler Rentals, Inc., 303 So. 2d 646 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Gobelman v. Gobelman, 316 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 1975)
- Edmond F. Dagnino v. Home Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF ST. Petersburg, 183 So. 2d 846 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)