Legal Opinion · Dissent

Farrior v. Farrior

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided June 24, 1999No. 93,329Published

1Dissent

I respectfully dissent.

In my view the district court has essentially ruled, without saying so, that there is no evidence to support the trial court's factual finding that the stock titled in the wife's name was a marital asset. However, there was evidence to support the trial court's finding. The majority opinion simply ignores this evidence and, instead, focuses on only one of the numerous matters that the trial court ultimately considered as relevant in reaching its factual conclusion. The comprehensive analysis in the final judgment, after the receipt of extensive evidence, speaks for…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Canakaris v. CanakarisSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
  2. Stevens v. StevensDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
  3. Heinrich v. HeinrichDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992
  4. Walser v. WalserDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
  5. Amato v. AmatoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API