Escalona Socarras v. Bazan Vassallo
Decision Date | 13 February 2019 |
Docket Number | No. 3D17-2579,3D17-2579 |
Citation | 273 So.3d 131 |
Parties | Edelmo ESCALONA SOCARRAS, Appellant, v. Nadja Marcela BAZAN VASSALLO, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
The Law Offices of Lizette Reboredo, P.A., and Lizette Reboredo, Miami, for appellant.
Andrew M. Kassier, P.A., and Andrew M. Kassier, for appellee.
Before SALTER, FERNANDEZ and LOGUE, JJ.
Edelmo Escalona Socarras, the Former Husband, appeals entry of a final judgment dissolving his marriage to Former Wife Nadja Marcela Bazan Vassallo. We agree with the Former Husband that the trial court erred in concluding that an equity line of credit secured by the former husband's Miami Property, a nonmarital asset, effectively commingled funds and transformed the Former Husband's Miami Property into a marital asset. We reverse the trial court's classification of the Miami Property as a marital asset and its award of a fifty percent interest in the Miami Property to the Former Wife.
Gromet v. Jensen, 201 So.3d 132, 135 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (citing Valladares v. Junco–Valladares, 30 So.3d 519, 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) ).
In 2003, the Former Husband purchased the Miami Property with nonmarital funds before he married the Former Wife. The couple married in late 2005. In 2007, the Former Wife moved from Peru to the United States and the Miami Property served as the marital home, but remained owned by, and titled in, the Former Husband's name alone. During the marriage, the Former Husband was the sole source of income and made all mortgage payments on the Miami Property. No evidence was presented that the Former Wife enhanced the value of the property through marital labor, made improvements to the home, or contributed financially.
During the marriage, the Former Husband obtained an equity line of credit in the amount of $89,000 for an investment in Peru, using the Miami Property as collateral. The investment did not yield any profit and resulted in financial loss. Approximately $72,000 of the investment was recovered, but $14,000 remained outstanding on the balance of the loan. The monies that were obtained from the equity line of credit were returned to that same line of credit, without the commingling of any marital funds.
Consequently, at trial, the Former Wife failed to establish that the Former Husband's Miami Property had been "transformed" to a marital asset. See Kaaa v. Kaaa, 58 So.3d 867, 872-73 (Fla. 2010) ( ); Higgins v. Higgins, 226 So.3d 901 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Equitable distribution and property issues
...or after July 1, 2018, the new statutory formula under section 61.075, Florida Statutes, applies. • Escalona Socarras v. Bazan Vassallo , 273 So. 3d 131, 133 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019). Under Kaaa, only an enhancement in value of the Miami Property, if any, minus any indebtedness, would become a ma......