Pollack v. Pollack
| Decision Date | 01 July 1947 |
| Citation | 31 So.2d 253,159 Fla. 224 |
| Parties | POLLACK v. POLLACK. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; Stanley Milledge judge.
Norman R Lyons, of Miami, for appellant.
Amos Benjamin, of Miami, for appellee.
Solomon Pollack and Florence Pollack owned a home as an estate by the entireties at 925 N.W. 52d Street, Miami, Florida. Florence Pollack secured a divorce from Solomon Pollack, who lived in the home up to the time the suit for divorce was instituted, and then removed from it. Florence Pollack with the two minor children are still living in the home.
The final decree of divorce granted Florence Pollack, the mother, the custody of the two minor children, with the right of visitation on the part of Solomon Pollack, the father; required the father to pay the mother $15 per week for their maintenance; it required him to pay all amounts due on that certain mortgage against the home, including interest, taxes and insurance; and gave the mother the use, occupancy and control of the home so long as she elected to occupy it with the minor children. Should she vacate it at any time, then the final decree provided that the parties hereto might agree on terms of rental or sale of the home. Both parties were prohibited from disposing of the furnishings without the written consent of the other.
In November, 1946 after the decree of divorce, Solomon Pollack instituted this cause by bill in equity praying for partition of the homestead, on the theory that although owned as an estate by the entireties prior to the divorce, and not subject to partition, subsequent to that event it became an estate of joint tenancy that might be partitioned. A motion to dismiss the bill was granted and this appeal was prosecuted.
The point for determination may be stated as follows: Is the homestead owned by the husband and wife as an estate by the entireties subject to partition after a decree of divorce, despite the fact that it was allotted to the wife and minor children as a place of resident by the decree of divorce?
Appellant contends that this question should be answered in the affirmative relying on Strauss v. Strauss, 148 Fla. 23, 3 So.2d 727, and that line of cases holding in part that absolute divorce destroys an estate by the entireties, and converts the husband and wife into joint tenants or tenants in common as to the estate.
If we were confronted with the divorce and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mallick v. Mallick
...v. Frazier, 109 Fla. 164, 147 So. 464, 465 (1933) ; see also Cone v. Cone, 62 So. 2d 907, 908 (Fla. 1953), and Pollack v. Pollack, 159 Fla. 224, 31 So. 2d 253, 254 (1947) (stating that courts of equity have inherent jurisdiction to protect infants who are wards of the court). This authority......
-
Lowe v. Broward County
...the duty to provide food, shelter and raiment for his own." McRae v. McRae, 52 So.2d 908, 909 (Fla.1951) (quoting Pollack v. Pollack, 159 Fla. 224, 31 So.2d 253, 254 (1947)). This court has referenced the "strong public policy which exists in this state in favor of the natural family unit."......
-
Bell v. Bell
...of the husband to support his former wife or his minor children. Such a provision may be proper under some circumstances. Pollack v. Pollack, 159 Fla. 224, 31 So.2d 253; cf. Anderson v. Anderson, Fla.1950, 44 So.2d 652. The forced sale with one-half of the proceeds going to the wife is not ......
-
Simms v. State, Dept. of Health & Rehabilitative Services
...wards of the court and the court had inherent power to protect them. Cone v. Cone, 62 So.2d 907, 908 (Fla.1953); Pollack v. Pollack, 159 Fla. 224, 226, 31 So.2d 253, 254 (1947); In re J.S., 444 So.2d 1148, 1149-50 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Section 39.40(2), Florida Statutes (1991), codifies the ......