Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1985

Barry v. Barry

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided December 5, 1985 · Cobb, Cowart, Dauksch, Orfinger, Sharp, Upchurch

480 So. 2d 671; 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2670; 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 17161 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

This case has been considered en banc because it sought to raise a question of exceptional importance: whether a pension earned during the course of a marriage should be treated as a marital asset for purposes of “equitable distribution.”1 Upon review of the record in this case, where each party has a vested pension and the trial court has retained jurisdiction, we have concluded that the trial judge’s determination was reasonable and must be af*672firmed, pursuant to the Canakaris test,2 irrespective of the answer to the foregoing question.

AFFIRMED.

COBB, C.J., DAUKSCH, ORFINGER, FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., SHARP and COWART, JJ., concur.

. See Tronconi v. Tronconi, 466 So.2d 203 (Fla. 1985).

. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197, 1203 (Fla. 1980).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.