RIVERA v. RIVERA (2019)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Alberto RIVERA, Appellant, v. Maria Teresa RIVERA, Appellee.

No. 3D18-1338

Decided: May 29, 2019

Before FERNANDEZ, LINDSEY, and MILLER, JJ.

Kevin Coyle Colbert, Miami, for appellant. The Padron Law Group, P.L.L.C., and Luis M. Padron, Coral Gables and Brian D. Fell, for appellee.

As neither party sought to partition the marital home, the body of jurisprudence relied upon by the former husband in furtherance of appellate relief is inapposite. Accordingly, we find no error and affirm. See Gulledge v. Gulledge, 82 So.3d 1113, 1114 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (narrowly holding that in partition cases “the trial court err[s] by failing to include a deadline for the refinancing or sale of the marital home”); Sullivan v. Sullivan, 363 So.2d 393, 395 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978) (discussing that in partition cases “the judgment must fix a reasonable deadline by which the sale must take place”); see also Smilack v. Smilack, 858 So.2d 1072, 1075 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (“[A] trial court may enforce the provisions of a final judgment through any appropriate remedy.”) (citing Montanez v. Montanez, 697 So.2d 184, 186 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)).

Affirmed.

MILLER, J.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network