Johnson v. Dowell, 91-00171
| Decision Date | 17 January 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. 91-00171,91-00171 |
| Citation | 592 So.2d 1194 |
| Parties | 17 Fla. L. Weekly D267 Gary W. JOHNSON, individually and Gary W. Johnson, as trustee, Appellant, v. Phyllis Johnson DOWELL, f/k/a Phyllis G. Johnson, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Daniel B. Schuh, St. Petersburg, for appellant.
Patrick T. Maguire, Clearwater, for appellee.
The appellant, Gary W. Johnson, challenges a final judgment which declared void a deed from himself to Gary W. Johnson as trustee and enforced the appellee's judgment lien on the property which had been conveyed by that deed. We reverse.
The appellant and the appellee, Phyllis Johnson Dowell, f/k/a Phyllis G. Johnson, formerly husband and wife, were divorced in the state of Illinois in 1980. In addition to many other requirements of the dissolution which are not material to this appeal, a marital settlement agreement, the final judgment dissolving the parties' marriage, and a subsequent agreed order amending the settlement agreement required the appellee to convey a condominium in Florida to the appellant and required the appellant to pay certain sums to the appellee. The agreed order required the appellant to pay to the appellee the sum of $30,000 on January 1, 1983. The payment of this sum and other amounts due the appellee was to be secured by an assignment of a beneficial interest in the marital residence which was in "the land trust in title to the family home" in Illinois or other security approved by the wife's attorney. The order provided further that if the family residence was sold, all payments, including the $30,000, would accelerate and be payable from the proceeds of the sale.
The appellee, pursuant to the parties' agreement, executed and delivered to the appellant a quit claim deed to the Florida condominium, the property involved in this action. The next day the appellant executed a warranty deed for the condominium to himself as trustee. The deeds and the irrevocable Illinois land trust agreement, which concerned the same condominium and which was executed after the deeds, were all recorded in Florida in December 1981.
In 1984, when the appellant had not fulfilled his obligations under the marital settlement agreement, the final judgment, and the agreed order, the appellee filed a law suit against him in Pinellas County, Florida. On June 7, 1985, the parties settled that action. The stipulation entered into between the parties once again referred to the former marital residence in Illinois. The stipulation provided that the parties would execute whatever instruments were necessary to amend the trust agreement to transfer all but the appellee's security interest in the former marital residence to the appellant. The stipulation provided further that the appellee would place in escrow all instruments necessary to release her security interest in the trust agreement or the final judgment in the dissolution case and in the case being litigated. The instruments were to be delivered to the appellant upon the discharge of all of his obligations. When the appellant did not comply with all of the terms of the stipulation, a final judgment in the amount of $33,366.08 was entered against him on January 17, 1986.
In 1988, the appellee filed the instant action against the appellant, individually and as trustee of the trust in which the condominium had been placed. The appellee's complaint sought to enforce her final judgment by foreclosing on the appellant's condominium. At the final hearing held in connection with this matter, the parties introduced exhibits supporting the above described events and the only testimony presented to the court was the testimony of the parties themselves. At the conclusion of the proceedings, the court found in favor of the wife and entered a judgment declaring that the deed conveying the condominium from the appellant to himself as trustee was void at its inception and that the appellant was the continuing owner of the property. The court specifically found that the trust was utilized for the purpose of defeating the claim and recovery of the wife. The court also found that there was sufficient indicia of fraud to support the finding of its intent: consideration paid for the trust deed; the transfer to a related party; continued retention and possession of control by the appellant; the concealment of the transaction for two years; and the appellant's retention of the right to all proceeds from the sale of any real property placed in the trust. The appellant filed a timely notice of appeal from the final judgment which declared that the appellant was the owner of the property and that the appellee's judgment was a lien subject to foreclosure on that property.
In order to establish a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reed v. Reed
...v. Covill, 192 Ariz. 9, 960 P.2d 55 (Ariz.App.1998); Leathem v. Leathem, 94 Ohio App.3d 470, 640 N.E.2d 1210 (1994); Johnson v. Dowell, 592 So.2d 1194 (Fla.App. 1992); In re Marriage of Pahlke, 154 Ill. App.3d 256, 507 N.E.2d 71, 107 Ill.Dec. 407 (1987); Sherry v. Sherry, 108 Idaho 645, 701......
-
Estate of Johnson v. Commissioner
...a conveyance, * * * several of them when considered together may afford a basis to infer fraud." See, e.g., Johnson v. Dowell, 592 So. 2d 1194, 1197 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992); Banner Constr. Corp. v. Arnold, 128 So. 2d at 896; United States v. Fernon, 640 F.2d at 613; see also Advest, Inc.......
-
Wiltzius v. Commissioner
...may be established if a sufficient number of badges of fraud are present. Advest, Inc. v. Rader, supra at 854; Johnson v. Dowell, 592 So. 2d 1194, 1197 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992); Wieczoreck v. H&H Builders, Inc., supra at 873; Banner Constr. Corp. v. Arnold, 128 So. 2d 893, 896 (Fla. Dist.......
-
In re v. Amelung, Case No.: 07-15492-BKC-PGH (Bankr. S.D.Fla. 4/7/2010), Case No.: 07-15492-BKC-PGH.
...of them when considered together may afford a basis to infer fraud.'" Id. (alterations in original) (quoting Johnson v. Dowell, 592 So.2d 1194, 1197 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)). The Trustee argues that the Transfer is tainted by the following five alleged badges of fraud: 1) there was no considerat......