Haynes v. Haynes
| Decision Date | 14 December 1948 |
| Parties | HAYNES v. HAYNES. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
On Rehearing Feb. 8, 1949.
Further Rehearing Denied Feb. 25, 1949.
Raymond & Wilson, of Daytona Beach, for petitioner.
Ernest A Rano, John L. Graham and Hull, Landis, Graham & French all of De Land, for respondent.
Dec. 14 1948, petition for writ of certiorari denied without opinion.
On Rehearing.
The petitioner here was plaintiff in a divorce suit wherein a final decree was rendered making certain awards to the plaintiff wife pursuant to a stipulation. The petitioner predicates her petition upon the recited facts and Section 65.15, F.S. 1941, F.S.A., which petition was dismissed, whereupon review by this Court is sought by certiorari.
Among other things, her petition to the Chancellor stated that in a suit for divorce, brought by petitioner, a stipulation was entered into as follows:
'It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the plaintiff and the defendant herein:
'1. That the Court may immediately proceed to consider this case on final hearing on the pleadings and the proofs heretofore taken, without other or further notice to, or argument by the plaintiff or the defendant, or counsel of record for either of said parties.
'2. That the exclusive custody and control of the minor children, Elizabeth Claire Haynes and Robert H. Haynes, a result of the marriage between plaintiff and defendant, be awarded to plaintiff, pending the further order of the Court, with the privilege given the defendant to visit said children at all reasonable times and places.
'3. That the defendant immediately surrender to the plaintiff upon the entering of a final decree herein, possession of her home particularly described as 'Lot Eight (8) of Block B, in Deckman's Subdivision of Block 112 of City of DeLand, according to Map in Map Book 4, page 111, of the Public Records of Volusia County, Also known as No. 425 North Orange Avenue, DeLand, Florida,' free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, by way of water rent, insurance premiums, taxes, mortgages, or otherwise.
'4. That the defendant pay to Murray Sams, Esquire, the sum of Five Hundred ($500.00) Dollars, which it is agreed is a reasonable attorney's fee for his services to the plaintiff in these proceedings.
'5. That the defendant pay one half (1/2) of the federal delinquent income taxes assessed jointly against plaintiff and defendant for the tax years 1940 and 1941.
'6. That the defendant pay one-fourth (1/4) of the federal income tax that will become due upon payment of the Alexander Calvin Haynes $15,000.00 legacy and accrued interest thereon.
'7. That the defendant pay all costs in these proceedings.
'8. That the defendant be permitted to retain possession and ownership of the Chevrolet Automobile involved in these proceedings, and that the plaitniff immediately assign and transfer into his name the certificate of title thereto, now standing in her name, and deliver the same to defendant.
'9. That the defendant in vacating and surrendering to the plaintiff possession of the real estate, described in paragraph 3 of this stipulation, be permitted to remove therefrom his personal belongings, and the furniture given to him by his mother and grandmother, located thereon and therein, as per list attached.
'10. That the Honorable R. H. Boyd, Trustee under the will of Alexander Calvin Haynes, be and he is hereby authorized to pay that certain legacy for $15,000.00, devised and bequeathed under paragraph 3 of the Will of Alexander Calvin Haynes, deceased, with accrued interest thereon to date of payment, as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Haynes v. Haynes
...of appellee herein for modification of the divorce decree so as to award alimony to her, is determinative of the issue. Haynes v. Haynes, Fla., 40 So.2d 123, 125. However, an examination of the opinion in the case will reveal that the ruling of this Court, that 'the petition is within the p......
-
Gemmel v. Gemmel
...The Chancellor was, or may have been, in error as to his reasons, for this Court has recently rendered two decisions, towit, Haynes v. Haynes, Fla., 40 So.2d 123, and Cohn v. Mann, Fla., 38 So.2d 465, which when considered by the Chancellor might lead him to a contrary conclusion. The quest......