Hadley v. Hadley, 61-380
Decision Date | 19 October 1961 |
Docket Number | No. 61-380,61-380 |
Citation | 140 So.2d 325 |
Parties | Etheline HADLEY, Appellant, v. Bruce A. HADLEY, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Holladay & Swann, Miami, for appellant.
William John Mason, Miami, for appellee.
Before PEARSON, TILLMAN, C. J., and HORTON and BARKDULL, JJ.
The appellee has moved to strike the third point of appellant's brief upon the ground that the point questions the propriety of the financial allowance made for the appellant in a final decree of divorce and the appellant has accepted payment of sums awarded her in the final decree for alimony and expenses. It was established by the Supreme Court of Florida in Brooks v. Brooks, Fla.1958, 100 So.2d 145, that under these conditions the appellant-wife has waived her right to appeal from the decree with respect to such awards. The appellant has admitted the acceptance of the benefits under the decree, but has urged that Florida Appellate Rules, Rule 3.8 as amended (effective July 7, 1961) 31 F.S.A. obviates the waiver rule as set forth in Brooks v. Brooks, supra. The rule, as amended, is as follows:
It is apparent that in order to bring herself under the quoted rule it is necessary for the appellant to apply to the lower court for an order requiring the payment of the separate maintenance, support or alimony pending such appeal. Because no such application was made in this case appellant's point number three may not be considered by this court and the same is stricken.
All other grounds of appellee's motion to strike are denied.
It is so ordered.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Fort v. Fort, F-262
...Co., supra; Brooks v. Brooks, 100 So.2d 145 (Fla., 1958); In Re Fredcris, Inc., 101 So.2d 49 (Fla.App., 1958); Hadley v. Hadley, 140 So.2d 325 (Fla.App., 1961); Carter v. Carter, supra; Rayle v. Merrill, supra; and Claus v. Claus, supra. In Hartley v. Hartley, 134 So.2d 281 (1961), the Seco......
- Pagnozzi v. State, 61-332
-
Lyons v. Lyons, 67--362
...as amended, obviated the waiver rule set forth in the concurring opinion of Brooks v. Brooks. This Court decided in Hadley v. Hadley, Fla.App.1962, 140 So.2d 325, that in order to bring oneself under Rule 3.8, subd. b, it would be neceessary for the appellant to apply to the lower court for......