¶1This case involves creditor’s rights and remedies; specifically, the right of a judgment creditor to have equitable execution on the judgment debtor’s equitable interest in property.
¶2There is substantial competent evidence
¶3The trial court correctly construed the property settlement agreement to recognize, or to create, in the judgment debtor an equitable title as to a one-half interest in the residence.
¶4At the instance of a judgment creditor in a supplementary proceeding, in which the judgment debtor’s ex-wife was interpleaded and given due process opportunity to defend, the trial court had equity *209jurisdiction, in the nature of a creditor’s bill in equity,
¶5The judgment below is
¶6AFFIRMED.
¶7. The property settlement agreement dated September 2, 1981, provided in part: "The parties agree that the wife shall immediately make arrangements to sell the residence described above. Upon such sale, and after payment of any and all obligations remaining on said residence, the parties shall divide the proceeds of the sale, fifty per cent (50%) to each.”
¶8. See generally George E. Sebring Co. v. O'Rourke, 101 Fla. 885, 134 So. 556 (1931); Cain and Bultman, Inc. v. Miss Sam, Inc., 409 So.2d 114 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).
¶9. See, e.g., Tomayko v. Thomas, 143 So.2d 227 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962).