CONSUELO M. PALERMO, APPELLANT,
v.
EDGARD F. PALERMO, APPELLEE
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 held that the trial court erred in its distribution of life insurance and credit card debt in the final judgment of dissolution.
The former wife appealed a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, specifically challenging the awards of life insurance and credit card debt. The …
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 Final Judgment Of Dissolution Of Marriage cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, former wife, appeals from a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We reverse as to the award of life insurance and distribution of credit card debt. We affirm as to all other points raised.
With respect to the life insurance policy, both at trial and on appeal, the appellee concedes that the former wife has been making the premium payments and that the policy should be her property provided that she is solely responsible for the payments. We reverse and remand for modification of the final judgment to reflect this concession. See Edwards v. Edwards, 559 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Sobelman v. Sobelman, 541 So. 2d 1153 (Fla.1989); Thiel v. Thiel, 426 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983).
As to the allocation of credit card debts, the trial court clearly intended to divide liabilities equally. Although the court allocated the credit card liability so that the sums owed by each party were roughly equal, the net effect of the distribution scheme was to allocate to the husband the credit card debt incurred solely by him after separation and to allocate to the wife credit card debts that were incurred for the joint benefit of both parties. We reverse and remand for a redetermination of credit card debt which distributes the joint credit card debts equally. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for treatment consistent with this opinion.
WARNER, PARIENTE and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Boyle v. Boyle, 30 So. 3d 665 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…use a date other than the filing date to identify marital and non-marital assets and liabilities. Thus, Moon does not comport with the current version of the statute. Neither Heslop v. Moore, 716 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) nor Palermo v. Palermo, 649 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) involved determinations that property acquired after separation was non-marital, but rather, that separation was a basis to unequally distribute such marital assets. Finally, the husband asserts that in Ross v. Bandi, 566 So. 2d…
-
Deane Krakower v. Krakower, 913 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…arties had substantial litigation costs which affected the level of their debt. Therefore, the court concluded that they were individual obligations and not marital debts. We find no abuse of discretion in this determination. See Palermo v. Palermo, 649 So. 2d 309, 309-10 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). We affirm as to the remaining issues raised. As to the IRA account, we conclude that treating this as the wife’s non-marital asset was correct when there was evidence that the money funding that account came., from Eart…
Authorities Cited
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)
- Goldie Sobelman v. Sobelman, 541 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 1989)
- Edwards v. Edwards, 559 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Thiel v. Thiel, 426 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)