Oyama v. Oyama
Decision Date | 02 June 1939 |
Citation | 138 Fla. 422,189 So. 418 |
Parties | OYAMA v. OYAMA et al. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Suit by Thomas Oyama against Annette Oyama and others to cancel a deed. From an order dismissing an amended bill of complaint plaintiff appeals.
Decree in accordance with opinion. Appeal from Circuit Court, Volusia County; H. B. Frederick, judge.
Chas F. Wells, of Daytona Beach, and Hilburn & Merryday, of Palatka, for appellant.
B. F Brass, of Daytona Beach, for appellees.
This appeal brings for review an order dismissing a second amended bill of complaint with prejudice. It was sought by this suit to cancel a deed of conveyance made to Annette Oyama and mortgage made to Alma Carlton as Trustee for the use and benefit of Annette Oyama, both of which were made and executed pursuant to a certain agreement dated August 9 1937, between Thomas Oyama and Annette Oyama as follows, to-wit:
'D. That the said party of the second part covenants and agrees that she is accepting the execution and delivery of said warranty deed and said note and mortgage as and for and in lieu of support money, maintenance, alimony, dower rights, and any and all other rights, claims or demands (except the right of divorce) of any nature or character whatsoever; past, present or future, which she now has or hereafter can or may have against the said party of the first part and/or his properties or estate, and as and for a full, complete and final settlement of the same.
'E. That the said Alma Carlton, as Trustee, shall hold said not and mortgage for the use and benefit of the said party of the second part, and, upon the said party of the second part securing and procuring the divorce hereinbefore referred to, shall thereupon transfer, assign and set over unto the said party of the second part said note and mortgage, and thereupon the said party of the second part shall own, have and hold said note and mortgage, with all the rights and benefits thereof and therefrom, as and for her own sole and absolute property, and in the event of the death of the said Annette Oyama prior to her securing and procuring such divorce, thereupon the said Alma Carlton as such Trustee, shall transfer, assign, setover and deliver said note and mortgage to such person or persons as may be entitled to the same under and by virtue of and in accordance with the terms and provisions of the Last Will and Testament of the said party of the second part.
'F. That in making of this agreement in making or arriving at the settlement herein set forth the parties hereto have taken into consideration any right, title, interest claims or demands of any nature or character whatsoever which the said party of the first part may have in and to any properties or the estate of the said party of the second part, and that this agreement and settlement herein set forth is based upon such accounting and consideration, and the said party of the first part hereby acknowledges that he has no right, title, interest, claims or demands of any nature or character whatsoever against the said party of the second part and/or her pro-properties or estate.
'4. It is further mutually covenanted and agreed by and between the parties hereto that any and all costs, charges and expenses heretofore or hereafter incurred or sustained by the said party of the second part in connection with or as a result of said breach and violations, including the costs charges and expenses of investigations, detectives, traveling expenses, and that the costs, expenses, charges and fees of the said B. F. Brass for services heretofore or hereafter rendered to the parties hereto, either or both, in connection with all the aforesaid matters and things, whether referred to herein or not, up to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Dorman v. Friendly
... ... will proceed with the determination of all the matters ... properly presented and will grant full relief.' See ... Oyama v. Oyama, 138 Fla. 422, 189 So. 418, 421, 122 ... A.L.R. 526 ... A court must not ... only have jurisdiction of the parties but it must ... ...
-
Benson v. Benson
...recognized and defined by the Florida Supreme Court. McMillan v. McMillan, supra, 120 Fla. 209, 162 So. 524; Oyama v. Oyama, 138 Fla. 422, 189 So. 418, 122 A.L.R. 526; Todd v. Todd, Fla.1952, 56 So.2d 441, 29 A.L.R.2d In McMillan v. McMillan, supra, 162 So. at page 526, the Supreme Court sa......
-
Graham v. Graham
...Rivenbark as authority for abatement. Rivenbark in turn cites Cicero v. Paradis, 184 So.2d 212 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966) and Oyama v. Oyama, 138 Fla. 422, 189 So. 418 (Fla.1939), cases which preceded the 1969 legislative enactment of section 47.122. Prior to the legislative enactment, courts had n......
- Williams v. City of Fernandina