Strollo v. Strollo, JJ-70
| Decision Date | 01 December 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. JJ-70,JJ-70 |
| Citation | 365 So.2d 189 |
| Parties | Vincent J. STROLLO, Appellant, v. Gertrude Harriet STROLLO, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Stephen A. Smith of Smith & Smith, Lake City, for appellant.
Lacy Mahon, Jr. of Mahon, Mahon & Farley, Jacksonville, for appellee.
Appellant, Vincent Strollo, appeals several points from a final judgment dissolving his marriage to appellee, Gertrude Strollo. The final judgment awarded appellee custody of the five minor children and exclusive use and possession of the marital home during the children's minority. Appellant was ordered to pay appellee $350 a month for alimony and $900 a month for child support.
Appellant's first argument that the trial judge abused his discretion in the amount of the alimony and child support award is without merit. We will not disturb findings or awards of the trial judge in dissolution proceedings absent a clear showing of abuse of discretion. Sisson v. Sisson,336 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1976); Moses v. Moses, 344 So.2d 1322 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Nor do we agree with appellant that the trial judge abused his discretion for awarding one lump sum child support payment rather than separate sums for each of the five children so that the award for each child would terminate upon the child's attaining his or her majority. See Jones v. Jones, 330 So.2d 536 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). We affirm the awards made as to the assertion that the trial court abused its discretion as to the amounts ordered.
We agree, however, that the awards should be amended to reflect that it is the husband's not the wife's responsibility for mortgage payments made on the marital home. The court's final judgment stated that the wife was "responsible for . . . mortgage payments out of the proceeds . . . provided by the Husband to the Wife as . . . alimony for the Wife and child support monies for the minor children." Despite the wife's use as conduit for the payments upon the mortgage, it is clear that the husband had the ultimate burden. The residence the parties owned during the marriage was held as a tenancy by the entireties. Upon divorce they owned it as tenants in common, and each had the burden of one-half the expenses. Lyons v. Lyons, 208 So.2d 137 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968). However, the party who is made responsible for the mortgage payments should be allowed credit against the non-paying party's one-half share from the proceeds of the sale of the home. Jones v. Jones, supra.
We conclude the cause...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fullerton v. Fullerton
...Heldmyer v. Heldmyer, 509 So.2d 1310 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Wood v. Friedman, 388 So.2d 1355 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Strollo v. Strollo, 365 So.2d 189 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Jones v. Jones, 330 So.2d 536 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Hendricks v. Hendricks, 312 So.2d 792 (Fla. 3d DCA spouse made the tuitio......
-
Lambert v. Lambert
...to exclusive possession of a marital home granted by a dissolution decree terminates upon that spouse's remarriage. Strollo v. Strollo, 365 So.2d 189 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Bailey v. Bailey, 361 So.2d 204 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Singer v. Singer, 342 So.2d 861 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Jones v. Jones......
-
Green v. Green
...is sold. Mitchell v. Mitchell, 477 So.2d 2 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Rubino v. Rubino, 372 So.2d 539 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Strollo v. Strollo, 365 So.2d 189 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). An exception to this general rule is where mortgage payments are made to meet child support obligations. Pastore v. Pas......
-
Lawlor v. Lawlor, 91-539
...Heldmyer v. Heldmyer, 509 So.2d 1310 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Wood v. Friedman, 388 So.2d 1355 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Strollo v. Strollo, 365 So.2d 189 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Jones v. Jones, 330 So.2d 536 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Hendricks v. Hendricks, 312 So.2d 792 (Fla. 3d DCA In dissolution cases, ......