Bell v. Bell,
\nCase No. 4D10-5122<\/p>\n
This was a divorce case with several contested issues regarding the parties\u2019 assets. Our client, the former wife, appealed the final judgment of dissolution of marriage. The former husband cross-appealed. Our client\u2019s main issues were (1) the trial court\u2019s failure to award her half of the husband\u2019s accounts receivable from loans he made to his businesses; and (2) the trial court\u2019s failure to make factual findings before denying her request for bridge-the-gap alimony.<\/p>\n
The Fourth District Court of Appeal (\u201cFourth DCA\u201d) agreed with our position that the trial court had erred in failing to award our client half of the husband\u2019s accounts receivable. The Fourth DCA reversed and remanded. On remand to the trial court, the former husband took the position that the issue required an evidentiary hearing to determine the new equitable distribution of the asset. We opposed the need for an evidentiary hearing, arguing that the Fourth DCA had clearly stated in its written opinion that the value of the omitted account receivable was $660,611 based on undisputed testimony from the trial. The trial court agreed and entered an order denying the former husband\u2019s demand for an evidentiary hearing.<\/p>\n
The former husband next argued that the former wife should receive the omitted equitable distribution amount as an in-kind distribution (i.e. in assets of the business such as the notes themselves). We opposed the former husband\u2019s position and argued that the former wife should receive the omitted amount as a cash distribution. The trial court received proposed Final Judgments from the parties reflecting the parties\u2019 positions. On June 7, 2012 the trial court rendered an Amended Final Judgment that conformed to the appellate court\u2019s mandate and also ordered that the omitted amount would be payable to former wife in cash in an amended equalization payment.<\/p>\n
This outcome preserved the positive result we achieved in the appellate court for our client, saved her the additional attorney\u2019s fees associated with a lengthy evidentiary hearing following remand, and obtained an order that the former husband must pay her the omitted equitable distribution amount in cash.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bell v. Bell, Case No. 4D10-5122 This was a divorce case with several contested issues regarding the parties\u2019 assets. Our client, the former wife, appealed the final judgment of dissolution of marriage. The former husband cross-appealed. Our client\u2019s main issues were (1) the trial court\u2019s failure to award her half of the husband\u2019s accounts receivable…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1811,1807,1806],"tags":[2421,2426,1858,1855,2073,2427,2428,2429,2043,2102,2185,2357,1932,1915,1853,2071,1912],"class_list":["post-2179","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-4th-dca-rulings","category-bresky-appellate-cases","category-family","tag-accounts-receiveable","tag-ammended-final-judgment","tag-appeal","tag-appellate-court","tag-attorneys-fees","tag-bresky-appellate","tag-brige-the-gap-alimony","tag-dissolution-of-marrage","tag-divorce","tag-equitable-distribution","tag-erred","tag-evidentiary-hearing","tag-fourth-dca","tag-judgment","tag-robin-bresky","tag-testimony","tag-trial-court"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2179","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2179"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2179\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2179"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2179"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssrga.com\/appellate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2179"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}