Wolfson v. Wolfson, s. 83-2125
| Decision Date | 29 August 1984 |
| Docket Number | 83-2430,Nos. 83-2125,s. 83-2125 |
| Citation | 455 So.2d 577 |
| Parties | Ronald F. WOLFSON, Appellant, v. Eva L. WOLFSON, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
We grant the petition for rehearing, withdraw our opinion issued on June 27, 1984, and substitute the following opinion.
The husband appeals four non-final orders of the trial court in a dissolution of marriage action. We have jurisdiction pursuant to Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.030(b)(1)(B) and 9.130(a)(3)(C)(i) and (iii). One of the orders the husband appeals denies the husband's motion to dismiss for lack of in personam jurisdiction. The remaining orders concern temporary alimony and child support.
Ronald and Eva Wolfson were married in New York in 1979 and made their marital home in Chile, where Mr. Wolfson was employed by an American bank. A son was born to the marriage. There came a time when Mrs. Wolfson left the marital home, taking the child with her, and took up residence in Palm Beach County, where her father also lives. When Mr. Wolfson, who has never resided in Florida, came to visit the child, he was served with summons and complaint in a marriage dissolution suit commenced by Mrs. Wolfson.
We hold that the trial court correctly denied appellant's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Still alive and well is the traditional principle that proper service on a person found within the territory of the state effects in personam jurisdiction when the person is present voluntarily, not because of fraud or trick, and not to appear in court on an unrelated matter. Appellant is mistaken when he contests the court's personal jurisdiction of him on the ground that he lacks connection with the state of the kinds set forth in section 48.193(1)(e), Florida Statutes (1983). That section comes into play where there is not already territorial jurisdiction, or personal jurisdiction has not otherwise been acquired. It expands rather than limits the historic jurisdiction of Florida courts, albeit it does not expand that jurisdiction as far as federal case law would permit.
Appellant also challenges both the award and the amount of temporary support for appellee and the parties' minor child. He contends that since appellee has liquid assets in the amount of $65,000 and derives interest income from a trust fund, that she is not entitled to temporary alimony. Alternatively, he argues that the amount of the award is excessive. Unfortunately, the trial court did not specify how much of the award represented alimony and how much represented child support. Such specification is preferred if not required. See Zalka v. Zalka, 100 So.2d 157 (Fla.1958).
Appellant relies on Grace v. Grace, 162 So.2d 314 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964), and argues that the statute authorizing allowance of temporary alimony does not apply when a wife has substantial liquid assets with which to keep herself in reasonable comfort pending final hearing. Here appellee admitted that she had $65,000 in liquid assets and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Burnham v. Superior Court of Cal.
...Carr v. Carr, 180 W.Va. 12-14, 375 S.E.2d 190, 192 (1988); O'Brien v. Eubanks, 701 P.2d 614, 616 (Colo.App.1985); Wolfson v. Wolfson, 455 So.2d 577, 578 (Fla.App.1984); In re Marriage of Pridemore, 146 Ill.App.3d 990, 991-992, 100 Ill.Dec. 640, 641-642, 497 N.E.2d 818, 819-820 (1986); Swart......
-
State, Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Child Support Enforcement ex rel. Luke v. Wright
...personal service of process within the state of Florida. T.J.K. v. N.B., 237 So.2d 592 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970); see also, Wolfson v. Wolfson, 455 So.2d 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). If Florida courts are to exercise long-arm jurisdiction over nonresidents in connection with paternity and child suppo......
-
Deal v. Deal
...her to temporarily relocate out of state); Brandenburg v. Brandenburg, 634 So.2d 315, 315 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Wolfson v. Wolfson, 455 So.2d 577, 578 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); see also Garone v. Parks, 668 So.2d 307, 307 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). We must next determine whether the notice of appeal wa......
-
Robbie v. Robbie
...that discretion in the absence of a showing that no reasonable man would take the view adopted by the trial court." Wolfson v. Wolfson, 455 So.2d 577, 579 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). It is not uncommon to find temporary relief awards reversed as excessive. See e.g., Barclay v. Barclay, 554 So.2d 1......
-
Emergencies and case management conference
...The judge has infinite discretion in family matters, which will not be disturbed in absence of abuse of discretion. [ Wolfson v. Wolfson, 455 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (trial court has broad discretion in deciding temporary matters, and appellate court will not disturb that discretion ......
-
Trial and evidence
...judge has infinite discretion in family matters, which will not be disturbed in absence of abuse of discretion. [ Wolfson v. Wolfson, 455 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (trial court has broad discretion in deciding temporary matters, and appellate court will not disturb that discretion in a......
-
Alimony and support
...marital assets and liabilities distributed to each party and whether spouse will be compelled to use those assets); Wolfson v. Wolfson, 455 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (wife was not to be compelled to consume her liquid assets to maintain style of living she and husband enjoyed); Greenbe......
-
Temporary relief
...may affect an alimony award, the court may consider assets in granting or denying support. [§61.08(2)(d), Fla. Stat.; Wolfson v. Wolfson, 455 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (wife was not to be compelled to consume her liquid assets to maintain style of living she and husband enjoyed); Barcl......