Michael A. Hardy, Former Husband v. Kimberly Hardy, Former Wife ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •          FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
    STATE OF FLORIDA
    _____________________________
    No. 1D17-277
    _____________________________
    MICHAEL A. HARDY,
    Former Husband,
    Appellant,
    v.
    KIMBERLY HARDY,
    Former Wife,
    Appellee.
    _____________________________
    On appeal from the Circuit Court for Nassau County.
    Robert M. Foster, Judge.
    September 9, 2019
    PER CURIAM.
    Former Husband challenges two provisions of the final
    judgment dissolving his marriage to Former Wife: the provision
    awarding Former Wife all marital assets despite a magistrate’s
    recommendation to divide the assets evenly, and the provision
    freezing his entire employee stock ownership plan and trust
    despite awarding Former Wife only half of it. We review for abuse
    of discretion the trial court’s decision to reject part of the
    magistrate’s recommendation. Davis v. Lopez-Davis, 
    162 So. 3d 19
    , 20 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). Finding none, and finding the trial
    court’s judgment supported by competent, substantial evidence,
    we affirm.
    The unique facts of this case support the trial court’s exercise
    of discretion. The evidence showed that Former Husband was an
    unemployed alcoholic with a history of domestic violence, who
    had not supported his family for over a year and lacked any
    means to do so. After the magistrate heard the issues and before
    the trial judge entered final judgment, Former Husband
    repeatedly violated a domestic-violence injunction and burned the
    marital home to the ground. He is now serving a 20-year prison
    sentence for arson, burglary, and aggravated stalking. After
    becoming aware of Former Husband’s crimes, the trial court was
    within its discretion to freeze the entire stock ownership plan to
    protect Former Wife’s rights to meaningful financial relief,
    including making up for the loss of the marital home. See
    Johnson v. Ferguson, 
    383 So. 2d 715
    , 716 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
    (noting Fla. R. App. P. 9.600(c) authorizes entry of orders
    necessary to protect party’s rights pending appeal). Given the
    present state of facts, presumably Former Wife will pursue
    further proceedings on remand.
    AFFIRMED.
    RAY, C.J., and KELSEY and JAY, JJ., concur.
    _____________________________
    Not final until disposition of any timely and
    authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
    9.331.
    _____________________________
    John M. Merrett, Jacksonville, for Appellant.
    William Mallory Kent of Kent & McFarland, Jacksonville, for
    Appellee.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-0277

Filed Date: 9/9/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/9/2019