¶1We reverse that portion of the final judgment of dissolution directing that the marital residence be sold. It is clear from even the limited record before us that there is no evidence or finding supporting that aspect of the final judgment. We remand for the final judgment to be amended to provide that Appellant is to have the use and possession of the home until the minor child of the parties reaches majority or the child is otherwise emancipated. Cruz v. Cruz, 574 So.2d 1117 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Kanouse v. Kanouse, 549 So.2d 1035 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Neustein v. Neustein, 503 So.2d 439 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Pino v. Pino, 418 So.2d 311 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). In all other respects the final judgment is affirmed. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla.1980).
611 So. 2d 1375
Bachman v. Bachman
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided February 10, 1993
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1993-02-10
Relies on 382 So. 2d 1197 - Canakaris v. Canakaris · 377 So. 2d 1150 - Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee · Kanouse v. Kanouse
Decided 1993-02-10