DeLoach v. DeLoach, 89-383
Decision Date | 21 November 1989 |
Docket Number | No. 89-383,89-383 |
Citation | 552 So.2d 324,14 Fla. L. Weekly 2692 |
Parties | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2692 Franklin DeLOACH, Appellant, v. Ruthie Mae DeLOACH, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
William H. Grant, III, Orange Park, for appellant.
Terance A. Jones, Orange Park, for appellee.
The former husband appeals an order of child custody and distribution of marital assets entered after a final judgment of dissolution of marriage which, inter alia, awards the former wife one-half of the husband's military retirement earned during the course of the marriage. The husband argues that the award was improper. We agree, and reverse and remand for reconsideration.
In his first point on appeal the husband asserts that the wife's failure to specifically seek an equitable distribution of the husband's pension precludes the court from considering this issue. We disagree. Military pension benefits should generally be considered as assets subject to equitable distribution or otherwise available as a source for payment of alimony to the extent that the benefits accrued during the marriage. Mollnow v. Mollnow, 530 So.2d 399 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Zipperer v. Zipperer, 508 So.2d 551 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). All dissolution proceedings are in chancery. § 61.011, Fla.Stat. A chancellor has the inherent right in such proceedings to adjudicate the equitable interests of the parties in property acquired during the marriage. Burns v. Burns, 174 So.2d 432 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965). Furthermore, the issue of the husband's pension rights was raised and considered without objection, so it was appropriate to treat it as if it had been raised in the pleadings. Robinson v. Robinson, 340 So.2d 935 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).
Notwithstanding our conclusion that the husband's military pension was properly at issue below, we agree with his contention that the paucity of evidence adduced on this issue cannot support the court's award. The pension evidence adduced was minimal compared to the extensive evidence presented on other issues. Left unresolved were the important issues of whether the pension was vested or mature, when it would become vested, its present value, or when the husband would be entitled to begin to receive his benefits thereunder. These issues could easily have been resolved by proper questioning of the husband or by the court taking judicial notice of the federal statutes governing the husband's pension rights. At least one decision has held that non-vested retirement benefits should not be...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
DeLoach v. DeLoach
...or treated as a source of alimony, there was insufficient evidence to support the trial court's award. DeLoach v. DeLoach, 552 So.2d 324 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (hereafter DeLoach I ). We remanded to the trial court to determine "whether the pension was vested or mature, when it would become ve......
-
Musgrave v. Musgrave
...she present any evidence during the two-day trial that would indicate the issue was tried by implied consent. See DeLoach v. DeLoach, 552 So. 2d 324, 325 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (holding when an issue regarding equitable distribution is raised and considered without objection, it is appropriate......
-
Sugrim v. Sugrim
...before the court where raised by the pleadings or where raised and considered by the court without objection. DeLoach v. DeLoach, 552 So.2d 324 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), appeal after remand, 590 So.2d 956 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). A prayer for equitable distribution of marital property has been broad......
-
Cox v. Cox
... ... Diffenderfer v. Diffenderfer, 491 So.2d 265 (Fla.1986); Deloach v. Deloach, ... 552 So.2d 324 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). We certify the following question to the ... ...
-
Pleadings and mandatory electronic filing
...and award of lump sum alimony for purpose of equitable distribution, even though alimony is not sought in petition); DeLoach v. DeLoach, 552 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (wife’s failure to specifically seek equitable distribution of husband’s pension did not preclude consideration of mili......