MARY DEONIASEA WESTBERRY, APPELLANT,
v.
ELVIS CLINTON WESTBERRY, 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 appellate court affirmed a divorce decree, upholding the trial court's finding that a stipulation agreement between the parties regarding alimony, child support, and attorney's fees was valid and binding.
Yes, the stipulation agreement was valid and binding. The trial court, after hearing testimony, evidently believed the husband's version that he executed and returned the stipulation.
“On this appeal by the appellant-wife from a final decree of divorce in her favor, the principal contention revolves around the court's finding that the parties entered into and were bound by a certain stipulation dated July 7,1965, covering the subjects of alimony, child support and attorney's fees.”
Identifies the main issue on appeal: the validity of a stipulation agreement.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe wife appealed a divorce decree granted in her favor, challenging the court's finding that a stipulation agreement concerning alimony, child suppor…
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 Reasonable Time For Acceptance cases and more on FLexlaw
On this appeal by the appellant-wife from a final decree of divorce in her favor, the principal contention revolves around the court’s finding that the parties entered into and were bound by a certain stipulation dated July 7,1965, covering the subjects of alimony, child support and attorney’s fees. Appellant asserts that the stipulation had not been signed and accepted by the appellee within a reasonable time, and was therefore presumed to have been rejected, while the appellee asserts that he executed the stipulation and returned it to his former counsel within a week. A copy of the signed stipulation appears in the record.
The Chancellor heard the testimony of the parties and evidently believed the ap-pellee’s version. Since all the points on appeal stem from the Chancellor’s determination that the stipulation was in fact executed and accepted, so that the parties were bound thereby, and no error or abuse of discretion in this regard having been made to appear, the decree appealed from is affirmed.
WIGGINTON, Acting C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and SACK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mendel v. Mendel, 257 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…resulted in arrears in child support was an afterthought. The law which is applicable in this situation requires reversal of the money judgment against the husband. Eaton v. Eaton, Fla.App.1970, 238 So. 2d 166; Westberry v. Westberry, Fla.App.1966, 191 So. 2d 871; Kramer v. Kramer, Fla.App.1962, 146 So. 2d 586. The rules of law governing this case were well stated by the fourth district court of appeal in Eaton v. Eaton, supra, as follows: “Although a father does have the legal duty to support his minor chi…