From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hatfield v. Hatfield

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jul 7, 1980
384 So. 2d 889 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

Opinion

No. 79-1143.

March 25, 1980. Rehearing Denied July 7, 1980.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Joseph J. Gersten, J.

Heiman Heiman and Eugene Heiman, Miami, for appellant.

Gelb Spatz and Monroe Gelb, Miami, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL and HUBBART, JJ., and EZELL, BOYCE F., Jr. (Ret.), Associate Judge.


The final judgment of marriage dissolution under review is affirmed upon a holding that: (a) the trial court on this record properly exercised its discretion in taking testimony on, and thereafter declining to approve a prior property settlement agreement between the parties, Harris v. Harris, 291 So.2d 95 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Risteen v. Risteen, 280 So.2d 488 (Fla.3d DCA 1973); (b) the wife acquiesced in, and did not object to the court's ruling on the taking of oral depositions and, accordingly did not properly preserve such ruling for appellate review, Karl v. David Ritter Sportsservice, Inc., 164 So.2d 23 (Fla.3d DCA 1964); and (c) the awards to the wife and children were well within the trial court's discretion to enter. Rosenberg v. Rosenberg, 371 So.2d 672 (Fla. 1979), adopting 352 So.2d 867 (Fla.3d DCA 1977) (Hubbart, J., dissenting); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So.2d 13 (Fla. 1976); Koeppel v. Koeppel, 351 So.2d 766 (Fla.3d DCA 1977); Pfohl v. Pfohl, 345 So.2d 371 (Fla.3d DCA 1977).

It is noted that appellate counsel were not trial counsel.


Summaries of

Hatfield v. Hatfield

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jul 7, 1980
384 So. 2d 889 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)
Case details for

Hatfield v. Hatfield

Case Details

Full title:LAURA HATFIELD, APPELLANT, v. RHETT HATFIELD, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jul 7, 1980

Citations

384 So. 2d 889 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

Citing Cases

Viltz v. Viltz

We do not reach the merits of his first contention, since the issue was not properly preserved below.…