Florida Court Cases - Case Law and Opinions from the Courts of Florida - unoffical reports - Opinions

ROMINGER LEGAL

Florida Case Law & Florida Court Opinions - Florida Law

Need Legal Help?

LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER

LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS

NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE

This court case was taken from the Florida Court's web site. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
WENDY ROGERS VAN DUYNE,
FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
Appellant,
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
v.
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
PETER VAN DUYNE,
CASE NO. 1D03-0274
Appellee.
_____________________________/
Opinion filed October 17, 2003.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.
Toby S. Monaco, Judge.
Mary Catherine Landt, Esquire, Ocala, for Appellant.
S. Scott Walker, Esquire, Gainesville, for Appellee.
BENTON, J.
In this appeal from a final judgment of dissolution, the mother of the two
children born to the parties' marriage argues that she should have been designated the
primary residential parent and that the trial court's findings do not support an unequal
division of marital assets.

We find no fault with the trial court's determination that rotating custody is in
the best interests of the children. See, e.g., O'Brien v. Crumley, 695 So. 2d 881 (Fla.
5th DCA 1997) (holding evidence supported determination that rotating custody was
in child's best interest where child had adjusted well to rotating custody schedule in
effect prior to determination and the child had close ties and a loving relationship with
both parents). See generally Charlee Perrow, Note, The Origin and Evolution of
Florida's Presumption Against Rotating Custody: A Guideline for Florida Judges, 30
Fla. St. U. L. Rev. 503, 507 (2003) ("Florida courts . . . consider various factors when
determining whether to order rotating custody instead of unquestionably applying the
presumption.").
We agree, however, that the trial court's findings fail to support the distribution
of marital assets that the judgment under review effects. "[T]he court must begin with
the premise that the distribution should be equal, unless there is a justification for an
unequal distribution based on all relevant factors" listed under section 61.075(1),
Florida Statutes. § 61.075(1), Fla. Stat. (2001). In the present case, the trial court
concluded that the down payment on the marital home (made less than two years into
the nineteen-year marriage) was a gift that did not give rise to a special equity under
section 61.075(5)(a), Florida Statutes. Gifts from one spouse to another are marital
property, § 61.075(5)(a)(3), Fla. Stat. (2001), that must be distributed like other marital
2

assets.
Insofar as it distributes the parties' assets only, the judgment is vacated; and the
case is remanded for findings in accordance with section 61.075(1), Florida Statutes,
and distribution of marital assets in accordance with the statute. The judgment is
otherwise affirmed.
BARFIELD and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., CONCUR.

3

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Florida Case Law & Florida Court Opinions - Florida Law
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -CLICK HERE