Beensen v. Burgess, 1341
| Citation | 218 So.2d 517 |
| Decision Date | 12 February 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 1341,1341 |
| Parties | Julia B. BEENSEN, John Crisafulli and Lucille Crisafulli, his wife, Charles D. Crisafulli and Ann Crisafulli, his wife, Ruby B. McMahon and Joalco, Inc., Appellants, v. Joseph Roland BURGESS, Jr., and Kathleen Burgess, his wife, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
George T. Kelly, III, Cocoa Beach, for appellants.
L. C. Crofton and Charles M. Harris, of Crofton, Holland, Starling & Goshorn, Titusville, for appellees.
Plaintiffs brought suit to quiet title to certain real property which they had purchased from one Walter Dunn in October, 1964. The defendants were holders of various judgments against Mr. Dunn, all of which were recorded several years prior to the time plaintiffs puchased the property. The issue was whether such property was entitled to the constitutional homestead exemption against forced sale, Florida Const., Art. X, § 1, F.S.A. The trial court determined this in the affirmative and entered its decree quieting plaintiff's title against the apparent clouds on the title created by virtue of defendants' judgment liens. We affirm.
Although Walter Dunn was divorced, he and his minor daughter, Barbara, resided on the property as their home. Barbara married in the spring of 1964, but since her husband was on active duty with the United States Navy, she continued to reside with her father, and Mr. Dunn continued to bear all household expenses and to exercise parental control over Barbara. In August, 1964, plaintiffs and Mr. Dunn entered into a sales agreement on the property, plaintiffs paying Mr. Dunn a cash deposit at that time. Although the sale was not closed until October, Mr. Dunn and his daughter vacated the property in September so that the plaintiffs could take possession and put their children in school at the beginning of the school term. Mr. Dunn and Barbara then moved in with another married daughter and her husband pending closing of the sale to plaintiffs. Defendants contend that the property had lost its entitlement to homestead exemption for several reasons, any one of which would allow the lien of their judgments to attach to the property.
Appellants' first point is that the homestead status of the property was lost upon Barbara's marriage, since Mr. Dunn no longer would be the head of a family. Without discussing whether such marriage eliminated Mr. Dunn's duty to support Barbara, there clearly remained a continuing communal living by at least two individuals under such circumstances that one is regarded as the person in charge. This is one of the two basic recognized tests to determine the existence of the family...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. Lewis, 80-115-Civ-Oc.
...must be based on the facts and circumstances of each case. Jacksonville v. Bailey, 159 Fla. 11, 30 So.2d 529 (1947); Beensen v. Burgess, 218 So.2d 517 (4th D.C.A. Fla. 1969). Abandonment of the homestead rights cannot be found unless the claimant has relinquished possession of the property ......
-
In re Wagenbach
...to the strong policy considerations expressed in Orange Brevard Plumbing. This conclusion is further buttressed by Beensen v. Burgess, 218 So.2d 517 (4th Fla.DCA 1969). The facts in Beensen are very analogous to those in the instant case. There the judgment debtors actually departed from th......
-
Burdick v. Burdick
...Meter, supra. Homestead status may be waived by abandonment. Nelson v. Hainlin, 89 Fla. 356, 104 So. 589 (Fla.1925); Beensen v. Burgess, 218 So.2d 517 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969). When homestead status has been acquired, it continues until the homestead is abandoned or alienated in the manner provi......
-
Mazzella v. Boinis, 92-3446
...residence with and contributed to support of disabled adult son who was employed was found to be head of the family); Beensen v. Burgess, 218 So.2d 517 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969) (father living with a married daughter whose husband was on active military duty found to be head of a family). These c......