Goedmakers v. Goedmakers, 86-2520
| Decision Date | 03 March 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 86-2520,86-2520 |
| Citation | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 667,504 So.2d 24 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 667 Ana Silvia GOEDMAKERS, Appellant, v. Harry GOEDMAKERS, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Miller and Schwartz and A. Matthew Miller, Hollywood, for appellant.
Heller and Kaplan and Lisa Heller Green, Miami, for appellee.
Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and FERGUSON, JJ.
Appellant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in denying her motion to dismiss a dissolution action as having been brought in an improper venue.
Appellee/husband commenced this action in Dade County. The evidence furnished by affidavits shows that appellant/wife lives in nearby Broward County where the parties resided before separating--over a year before this action was commenced. A thriving business operated by the husband, in which the wife holds a substantial ownership interest, is located in Dade County. The witnesses having professional knowledge of the nature and value of the business are also located in Dade County. Undoubtedly, the disclosure and division of the property located in Dade County will be the focus of the trial.
There is statutory support for the choice of venue and appellant/wife has not demonstrated that the court, for any other reason, should have ordered the case tried in Broward County. See § 47.011, Fla.Stat. (1985); Groome v. Abrams, 448 So.2d 82 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (); cf. Thames v. Thames, 449 So.2d 402 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) ().
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Goedmakers v. Goedmakers
...Lisa Heller Green and Daniel Neal Heller of Heller and Kaplan, Miami, for respondent. BARKETT, Justice. We review Goedmakers v. Goedmakers, 504 So.2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), based upon conflict with Crawford v. Crawford, 415 So.2d 870 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), and Carroll v. Carroll, 322 So.2d 53......