Wright v. Wright, 86-966
| Decision Date | 23 April 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 86-966,86-966 |
| Citation | 505 So.2d 699,12 Fla. L. Weekly 1089 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1089 David K. WRIGHT, Appellant, v. Miriam R. WRIGHT, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Nancy F. Alley, of O'Neill & Chapin, Orlando, for appellant.
Donna L. Surratt-McIntosh and Kenneth W. McIntosh, of Stenstrom, McIntosh, Julian, Colbert & Whigham, P.A., Sanford, for appellee.
Both parties agree the sole issue in this appeal is whether the trial judge erred in rendering the final judgment of dissolution by refusing to treat the appreciated value of real estate and a building located on it as a marital asset subject to equitable distribution. 1 The asset was owned by appellee (the former wife) prior to the marriage, and the increase in value was due solely to inflation and growth factors of the Central Florida market place and economy. We affirm.
The record in this case established that in 1970 appellee and her sister purchased real estate located in Sanford, Florida. They constructed a dance studio on the property which houses their "School of Dance Arts." Appellee has continuously operated a dance enterprise on the premises with her sister. In 1975 appellant and appellee were married. Counsel for both parties stipulated that the appreciated value of appellee's half interest in the disputed asset was not the result of the business operated on the property by appellee, nor attributable to any change, repair, renovation or maintenance paid for by appellee's earnings during the marriage. Rather, the increase in value was a passive increase.
Equitable distribution of marital assets in a dissolution proceeding is a court-evolved concept stemming from the seminal case of Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980). Unlike some other "equitable distribution" states where marital assets are defined by statute, 2 Florida has dealt with what constitutes marital assets on a case-by-case basis. However, no appellate court in Florida to our knowledge has held that the appreciated value of one spouse's separately owned asset occurring during a marriage should be considered as a marital asset subject to equitable distribution, absent a showing that either marital funds, assets, or the work efforts of one or both spouses contributed in some measure to the enhanced value of the asset.
In Webb v. Webb, 498 So.2d 1059 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986), this court held the appreciated value of an asset partially inherited by one spouse should be considered marital property subject to equitable distribution to the extent marital funds were used to acquire an ownership interest in the balance of the property, or enhance its value, or to the extent the enhancement was attributable to the efforts of the parties. Implicit in that holding is the converse: if no marital efforts, earnings or funds were used to acquire the asset, or to enhance its value, the asset, together with any appreciated value, is not a marital asset subject to equitable distribution.
In Rion v. Rion, 421 So.2d 541 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), we upheld a trial court's refusal to equitably distribute the appreciated value of a spouse's prior-owned assets, where the increase was not due to any marital work efforts or funds. Likewise, in Gardner v. Gardner, 452 So.2d 981 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), this court reversed the equitable distribution of an asset acquired by one spouse as a gift during the marriage on...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Straley v. Frank
...value of Straley's interest in non-marital real estate partnerships (601 and Harbor property) as a marital asset. See Wright v. Wright, 505 So.2d 699 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Section 61.075(3)(a)2 defines "marital assets and liabilities" as including "the enhancement in value and appreciation o......
-
Straley v. Frank
...value of Straley's interest in non-marital real estate partnerships (601 and Harbor property) as a marital asset. See Wright v. Wright, 505 So.2d 699 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Section 61.075(3)(a)2 defines "marital assets and liabilities" as including "the enhancement in value and appreciation o......
-
Turner v. Turner
...1988); Szemborski v. Szemborski, 512 So.2d 987, 989 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987), review denied, 520 So.2d 586 (Fla.1988); Wright v. Wright, 505 So.2d 699, 700 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). Thus, an equitable distribution determination should recognize the enhanced value of assets owned solely by one spouse ......
-
Green v. Green, 88-1231
...far superior economic circumstances. REVERSED in part; AFFIRMED in part; REMANDED. COBB and DANIEL, JJ., concur. 1 Wright v. Wright, 505 So.2d 699 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Rabben v. Rabben, 468 So.2d500 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Gardner v. Gardner, 452 So.2d 981 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).2 An equal divisi......
-
§ 6.04 Appreciation of Separate Property During Marriage
...1987). Florida: Barner v. Barner, 716 So.2d 795 (Fla. App. 1998); Macaluso v. Macaluso, 523 So.2d 615 (Fla. Ap. 1988); Wright v. Wright, 505 So.2d 699 (Fla. App. 1987). Cf., Young v. Young, 606 So.2d 1267 (Fla. App. 1992). Georgia: Halpern v. Halpern, 256 Ga. 639, 352 S.E.2d 753 (1987). Ida......