Johnson v. Johnson

Decision Date27 March 1951
Citation51 So.2d 421
PartiesJOHNSON et al. v. JOHNSON et al.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Rosin & Paderewski, Sarasota, and Virgil L. Milbrath, Ocala, for appellants.

D. Niel Ferguson and L. W. Duval, Ocala, for appellees Elnora Johnson and Cummer Lime & Manufacturing Co.

Wendell C. Heaton, Tallahassee, for appellee Florida Industrial Commission.

John M. Green, Ocala, for appellee Annie B. Johnson.

HOBSON, Justice.

On January 19, 1949, Sylvester Lee Johnson was injured as the result of an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. Death ensued on January 26, 1949, and under our Workmen's Compensation Law, Section 440.01 et seq., Florida Statutes 1941, F.S.A., claims for compensation were filed. These claims were made by Mary Johnson, Elnora Johnson and Annie Johnson, each claiming to be deceased's legal widow and entitled to an award as such. The Deputy Commissioner concluded that Annie, deceased's last spouse, was his legal widow and such finding has reached us without reversal or modification. The Deputy Commissioner found that the presumption of validity of Annie's marriage to deceased was not successfully rebutted because (1) the whereabouts of deceased from the time of separation from his first wife until his death had not been traced convincingly; (2) it was not successfully shown that deceased had failed to obtain a divorce from either of his previous wives in some state other than Florida and (3) the proof was not convincing that deceased had confined his whereabouts to Florida during the period from 1928 to his death.

We are here concerned with the question of the validity of deceased's third and last marriage.

The deceased married Mary in September, 1926, and separated from her in 1928. In December, 1929, he married Elnora, with whom he lived until 1947 and by whom he had a child. In 1947 he separated from Elnora and in October of that year he married Annie with whom he lived more or less regularly until his death. Annie bore him one child and was pregnant at the time of his demise.

Mary's uncontradicted testimony disclosed that deceased had communicated with her at fairly regular intervals during the entire period of their separation, knew at all times of her whereabouts and visited her at intermittent periods. Because of deceased's inability to write, his mother had written his letters to Mary, in many of which he enclosed money for her. Further uncontradicted testimony by Mary and deceased's mother established their lack of any knowledge of a divorce between Mary and deceased. A certificate from the Bureau of Vital Statistics showed that no divorce had been reported for deceased and Mary between the time of their separation and his death.

The evidence reflects at most no more than a slight suspicion that deceased might have had the opportunity at some undisclosed time to cross the state line. It is not suggested that deceased availed himself of such possible opportunity. Actually the evidence, considered as a whole, shows that he was at all times a resident of Florida. This is established by the fact that although deceased had lived with four different women during the period from 1926 to 1949, he enjoyed an almost unbroken life of cohabitation with these women, who lived in Florida. It is further shown that the periods between his first and second separations and subsequent alleged marriages were devoted to exploring 'green pastures'--'chasing' the not too elusive new 'heartthrob.'

We are fully cognizant of the presumption of validity which exists in favor of a last marriage and of the burden of rebutting this presumption which rests upon the party attacking such marriage. See Roberts v. Roberts, 124 Fla. 116, 167 So. 808; J. J. Cater...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Sikes v. Guest
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • December 16, 1964
    ...King v. Keller, Fla.App.,1960, 117 So.2d 726; Perkins v. Richards Constructors, Inc., Fla.App.,App.1959, 111 So.2d 494; Johnson v. Johnson, Fla.App.,1951, 51 So.2d 421; Roberts v. Roberts, 1936, 124 Fla.App., 116, 167 So. 808. As noted previously the defendant filed nothing in support of hi......
  • Estate of Perez, In re, 84-719
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • May 21, 1985
    ...secured the divorce," which is all that is required under the laws of this state. Teel, 93 So.2d at 876; see also Johnson v. Johnson, 51 So.2d 421, 422 (Fla.1951). 1 There is no cross appeal on the point, but appellee objected to the expert testimony of an attorney trained in Cuba as to the......
  • King v. Keller
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • February 3, 1960
    ...Co. v. Banks, 1943, 152 Fla. 377, 11 So.2d 776. In Teel v. Nolen Brown Motors, Inc., Fla.1957, 93 So.2d 874 and in Johnson v. Johnson, Fla.1951, 51 So.2d 421 this presumption is referred to as 'one of the strongest known to the Petitioner's argument is that the instant case should be govern......
  • Yohn's Estate, In re
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • July 29, 1970
    ...the absence of a reasonable probability that her husband actually secured the divorce.' (Emphasis supplied.) (p. 876) In Johnson v. Johnson, 51 So.2d 421 (Fla.1951), Mary, the first wife, introduced a certificate from the Bureau of Vital Statistics, showing that no divorce had been reported......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT