Wertheimer v. Wertheimer, 85-2008
| Decision Date | 22 April 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 85-2008,85-2008 |
| Citation | 487 So.2d 90,11 Fla. L. Weekly 943 |
| Parties | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 943 Nancy WERTHEIMER, Appellant, v. Theodore WERTHEIMER, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Loren G. Coy, Winter Spring, for appellant.
Shapiro, Leder, Breitner & Taplin and Paul Breitner, Miami, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARKDULL and NESBITT, JJ.
The ex-wife appeals from a judgment partitioning the parties' jointly held former home.
The parties' 1968 judgment of divorce granted Mrs. Wertheimer the right to reside in the home but ordered her to make all the mortgage payments--which she did.The trial court correctly ruled that, under the law, the ex-wife was entitled to a credit, against her husband's share of the proceeds of the partition sale, of the one-half of all the payments--including, of course, principal, interest, insurance and taxes--which was attributable to his interest in the property.SeePotter v. Garrett, 52 So.2d 115(Fla.1951);Price v. Price, 389 So.2d 666(Fla. 3d DCA1980), pet. for review denied, 397 So.2d 778(Fla.1981).In fact, however, the court credited her only with his share of the principal reduction; it disallowed credits for interest, insurance and taxes because of the absence of evidence reflecting the exact sums paid for those items.This occurred, in turn, because of the court's refusal, on highly technical grounds relating to the timeliness and form in which it was submitted, to consider proffered documentary evidence--consisting of cancelled checks, receipts and the like--which indisputably showed those amounts.We find that, under the circumstances of this case, the exclusion of this evidence constituted an unjustified abuse of discretion.Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197(Fla.1980);Akins v. Taylor, 314 So.2d 13(Fla. 1st DCA1975).Accordingly, the judgment under review is partially reversed and the cause is remanded with directions to provide for an additional credit to the appellant of one-half of the payments for interest, insurance and taxes.
The appellant has demonstrated no harmful error in the lower court's crediting the husband with one-half of the rental value of three rooms in the home for the period after the youngest child reached majority and the right of the wife to exclusive occupancy therefore terminated under the judgment of divorce.SeeBailes v. Bailes, 468 So.2d 396(Fla. 3d DCA1985);Adkins v. Edwards, 317 So.2d 770(Fla. 2d DCA1975).
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brandt v. Brandt
...property during the time of her possession. Whiteley v. Whiteley, 329 So.2d 352, 353 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). See also Wertheimer v. Wertheimer, 487 So.2d 90 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Tate v. Tate, 432 So.2d 601 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Price v. Price, 389 So.2d 666 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), rev. denied, 397 S......
-
Fischer v. Fischer
...share of the ownership expenses upon sale of the property. Tinsley v. Tinsley, 490 So.2d 205 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Wertheimer v. Wertheimer, 487 So.2d 90 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Delehant v. Delehant, 442 So.2d 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Monnar v. Monnar, 422 So.2d 362 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Kohn v. K......
-
Tinsley v. Tinsley
...the ex-spouse as tenants in common is entitled to a credit for the ex-spouse's share of the ownership expenses. Wertheimer v. Wertheimer, 487 So.2d 90 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Price v. Price, 389 So.2d 666 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), rev. denied, 397 So. 2d 778 (Fla.1981); Rutkin v. Rutkin, 345 So.2d 40......
-
Gutierrez v. Gutierrez, 87-2296
...and Alexander D. Varkas, Jr., for appellee. Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and FERGUSON, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Wertheimer v. Wertheimer, 487 So.2d 90 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Adkins v. Edwards, 317 So.2d 770 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); compare Jefferies v. Corwin, 363 So.2d 600, 601 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); T......