From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barry v. Barry

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jan 6, 1986
480 So. 2d 671 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

Opinion

No. 84-1097.

December 5, 1985. Rehearing Denied January 6, 1986.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County; Frank N. Kaney, Judge.

Leon M. Boyajan, II, of J. Russell Hornsby, P.A., Orlando, for appellant.

Michael B. Swindle, Winter Park, for appellee.


This case has been considered en banc because it sought to raise a question of exceptional importance: whether a pension earned during the course of a marriage should be treated as a marital asset for purposes of "equitable distribution." Upon review of the record in this case, where each party has a vested pension and the trial court has retained jurisdiction, we have concluded that the trial judge's determination was reasonable and must be affirmed, pursuant to the Canakaris test, irrespective of the answer to the foregoing question.

See Tronconi v. Tronconi, 466 So.2d 203 (Fla. 1985).

See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197, 1203 (Fla. 1980).

AFFIRMED.

COBB, C.J., DAUKSCH, ORFINGER, FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., SHARP and COWART, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Barry v. Barry

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jan 6, 1986
480 So. 2d 671 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)
Case details for

Barry v. Barry

Case Details

Full title:CONSTANCE A. BARRY, APPELLANT, v. FRANKLIN M. BARRY, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Jan 6, 1986

Citations

480 So. 2d 671 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)