Bollaci v. Nieporte-Bollaci, 4D03-226.
| Decision Date | 31 December 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. 4D03-226.,4D03-226. |
| Citation | 863 So.2d 440 |
| Parties | Brian J. BOLLACI, Appellant, v. Naomi C. NIEPORTE-BOLLACI, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Jennifer S. Carroll and Diane F. Medley of the Law Offices of Jennifer S. Carroll, P.A., Palm Beach Gardens, for appellant.
Terrence P. O'Connor of Morgan, Carratt and O'Connor, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.
Brian Bollaci appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage. We affirm on all issues except the one challenging the trial court's requirement that appellant and his former wife share equally in any proceeds that appellant might receive in the future from his pending personal injury claim.
A few months after the former wife filed a petition for dissolution of marriage, appellant was involved in an automobile accident. During the dissolution of marriage trial, neither party presented any evidence concerning the circumstances surrounding the accident, the nature and extent of any injuries sustained by appellant, the filing of a personal injury lawsuit, or any settlement negotiations. However, in the final judgment of dissolution of marriage, the trial court ordered as follows:
The parties shall equally share in any proceeds receive[d] from Husband's claim in connection with Husband's automobile accident on May 20, 2002. Husband shall immediately provide to Wife any settlement documents and judgments in connection with said case.
We agree with appellant that the court erred in treating the proceeds of his personal injury claim as marital assets and equally distributing them. In Weisfeld v. Weisfeld, 545 So.2d 1341 (Fla.1989), the supreme court held that in determining whether a worker's compensation award is marital property, the trial court should use an analytical, rather than a mechanistic or unitary, approach. The court should consider the purpose of the award and focus on the award's "elements of damages." Id. at 1343. Only that portion of damages paid to the injured spouse as compensation for past lost wages and loss of earning capacity is to be considered marital property. Id. at 1345. Damages for future loss of earnings and loss of earning capacity and future medical expenses are the separate property of the injured spouse, although they may be considered in fashioning alimony and support awards. Id.; see also White v. White, 820 So.2d 432 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)(citing Weisfeld and holding that future lump sum payments to husband pursuant to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Weisberg v. Weisberg (Ex parte Weisberg)
...874, 606 N.Y.S.2d 825 (1994). The third approach is sometimes referred to as the analytic approach. See Bollaci v. Nieporte–Bollaci, 863 So. 2d 440 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003) ; Tynes v. Tynes, 860 So. 2d 325 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003) ; and Sullivan v. Sullivan, 159 S.W.3d 529 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005......
-
Smith v. Smith, 2050427.
...A.D.2d 874, 606 N.Y.S.2d 825 (1994). The third approach is sometimes referred to as the analytic approach. See Bollaci v. Nieporte-Bollaci, 863 So.2d 440 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2003); Tynes v. Tynes, 860 So.2d 325 (Miss.Ct.App.2003); and Sullivan v. Sullivan, 159 S.W.3d 529 (Mo. Ct.App.2005). Und......
-
Smith v. Smith
...A.D.2d 874, 606 N.Y.S.2d 825 (1994). The third approach is sometimes referred to as the analytic approach. See Bollaci v. Nieporte-Bollaci, 863 So.2d 440 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2003); Tynes v. Tynes, 860 So.2d 325 (Miss.Ct. App.2003); and Sullivan v. Sullivan, 159 S.W.3d 529 (Mo.Ct.App.2005). Und......
-
Gibbons v. Gibbons
...property of the injured or disabled spouse. See White v. White, 705 So.2d 123, 124 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Bollaci v. Nieporte-Bollaci, 863 So.2d 440, 442 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Thus, to the extent that benefits payable under a private disability policy represent a substitute for future lost inco......
-
Equitable distribution and property issues
...Future lump sum payments are to compensate for loss of future earning capacity; these are not marital property. [ Bollaci v. Bollaci, 863 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (error to require that husband and wife share equally in any proceeds husband might receive in future from his pending per......