Lindquist v. Lindquist, 76-1194
| Decision Date | 04 November 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-1194,76-1194 |
| Citation | 351 So.2d 391 |
| Parties | Frances L. LINDQUIST, Appellant, v. Elmer W. LINDQUIST, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Gerald C. Surfus, of Stinnett, Surfus & Martin, P.A., Sarasota, for appellant.
Gregory S. Hartman, of Swisher & Voigt, P.A., Sarasota, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a judgment of dissolution. The only point which merits discussion concerns the disposition of a mobile home.
The parties were married on January 11, 1975. Shortly thereafter, the husband used $6,000 of his own funds to purchase a mobile home and caused it to be titled in the names of himself and his wife. The parties separated several months later, and a suit for dissolution was filed on September 8, 1975. In the final judgment the court awarded the mobile home to the husband.
This court recently held that where a wife's separate funds were used to purchase property held as tenants by the entirety subsequent to the adoption of Florida's 1968 Constitution but before the Supreme Court's opinion in Ball v. Ball, 335 So.2d 5 (Fla.1976), there existed a presumption that a gift had been made. 1 While there has been a split of authority in the case of a wife's separate funds, 2 until the Supreme Court rendered its Ball opinion the use of a husband's separate funds to acquire property held as tenants by the entirety has always resulted in the presumption of a gift. 3
This suit was filed prior to the date of the Ball opinion. Therefore, since the record is totally devoid of any evidence to rebut the presumption of a gift, the judgment must be reversed insofar as it deprives the wife of her one-half interest in the mobile home. See Section 689.15, Florida Statutes (1975). Otherwise, the judgment is affirmed.
RYDER, J., and McNULTY, JOSEPH P. (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Moore v. Moore, 80-1328
...J., dissenting).7 Atkins v. Atkins, 326 So.2d 259 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).8 Lieber v. Lieber, 40 So.2d 111 (Fla.1949); Lindquist v. Lindquist, 351 So.2d 391 (Fla.2d DCA 1977); Maryea v. Maryea, 320 So.2d 882 (Fla.2d DCA ...
-
Hagin v. Hagin
...to the wife is intended as to her undivided half interest therein. See Strauss v. Strauss, 148 Fla. 23, 3 So.2d 727 (1941); Lindquist v. Lindquist, 351 So.2d 391 (Fla.2d DCA, filed November 4, 1977). Upon dissolution of marriage, the former spouses automatically become tenants in common as ......
-
Sudholt v. Sudholt
...that in view of Ball v. Ball, 335 So.2d 5 (Fla.1976), Merrill v. Merrill, 357 So.2d 792 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), and Lindquist v. Lindquist, 351 So.2d 391 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977), the denial of the special equity "does not comport with Florida law nor with logic and reason." (Brief for Appellant at ......