Power v. Power

• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: WALKER, GRISSIM H.
• Citation: Power v. Power, 387 So.2d 546 (Fla. App. 1980)
• Decision Date: 10 September 1980
• Docket Number: No. 80-59,80-59
• Parties: Shirley M. POWER, Appellant, v. Shirley L. POWER, Appellee.

Page 546

387 So.2d 546

Shirley M. POWER, Appellant, v. Shirley L. POWER, Appellee.

No. 80-59.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Sept. 10, 1980.

Jon S. Rosenberg, Orlando, for appellant.

Stephen M. Stone of Segal, Woods & Stone, Orlando, for appellee.

WALKER, GRISSIM H., Associate Judge.

Husband brought a suit for partition, following an earlier dissolution of marriage in 1973 wherein the husband was awarded custody of the minor children and was given possession of the marital home:

until the youngest child reaches majority, dies, marries or otherwise becomes self-supporting, at which time the parties may dispose of said home as they mutually agree, and if they cannot agree, then either party may petition the Court to partition said home and upon the sale of the same to divide the net proceeds equally between them.

The youngest child reached majority in June, 1979. The parties could not agree on a disposition of the home and the suit for partition followed.

In the partition proceeding, the husband sought reimbursement for one-half of the amount he had expended during his occupancy for reduction of principal on the first and second mortgages on the property and for taxes. The wife sought reimbursement for one-half of the fair rental of the property during the husband's occupancy. The trial court rejected the claim of the wife and awarded the husband credit for one-half of his payments on mortgage principal and taxes. The wife appealed the trial court's denial of her request for reimbursement. We affirm.

The trial court was correct in awarding the husband reimbursement for one-half of his payments of principal on the mortgages and taxes. Rubino v. Rubino, 372 So.2d 539 (Fla.1st DCA 1979). Indeed, the wife does not contest this reimbursement.

The trial court was equally correct in denying reimbursement to the wife of one-half of the rental value of the home. The husband was awarded custody of the children and no monetary support was ordered to be paid by the wife to the husband for the support of the children. However, as the wife's contribution to the support of the children, the husband was awarded possession of the residence during the minority of the children. In Duncan v. Duncan, 379 So.2d 949 (Fla.1980), the Supreme Court stated that "exclusive possession of property subject to disposition in a dissolution proceeding (may be awarded where it is) directly connected to the obligation to pay support or temporarily...