Inman v. Inman

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT January Term 2010 ROBERT M. INMAN, Appellant, v. CAROL H. INMAN, Appellee. No. 4D09-194 [February 10, 2010] PER CURIAM. In a final judgment of dissolution of marriage, the trial judge essentially reserved jurisdiction to determine which item of the husband s property would b e subject to a lien to secure the wife s alimony payments. The trial judge reasonably took this action as a result of the husband s mistaken belief that a certain asset could be encumbered. As a result, a term in the parties mediation agreement could not be completely fulfilled. Although the final judgment had the effect of terminating the marriage and finally adjudicating certain issues, procedurally it did not bring an end to the judicial labor required in this case. Therefore, the order is not appealable as a final order. See Demont v. Demont, 34 Fla. L. Weekly D2623 (Fla. 1st DCA Dec. 22, 2009). We dismiss the appeal without prejudice to either party s right to file a timely notice of appeal after a final order has been rendered by the trial court. GROSS, C.J., MAY and CIKLIN, JJ., concur. * * * Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Indian River County; Paul B. Kanarek, Judge; L.T. Case No. 07-351-FR01. Wayne R. McDonough of Wayne R. McDonough, P.A., Vero Beach, for appellant. Craig M. Rappel of Rappel Health Law Group, P.L., Vero Beach, for appellee. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.