difference factors in Florida

2005When deciding whether to enforce a prenuptial agreement, trial courts must "carefully examine the circumstances" surrounding the agreement because parties to a prenuptial agreement are not "dealing at arm's length." Casto, 508 So.2d at 334 .

1958“It follows, therefore, that when an absolute gift is made of the sum which is compounded from the elements going into the computation of ‘support and maintenance,’ it assumes the nature of any other absolute gift and is not subject to defeat by an extraneous condition. * * * ” However, it can be readily seen that the principle therein discussed is qualified by the words “if absolute,” and a quotation in the plaintiff’s brief which approaches the question under consideration more closely, at least by analogy, is one from In re Martin’s Will, 1936, 269 N.Y. 305 , 199 N.E. 491, 494 , where the f

1958“It follows, therefore, that when an absolute gift is made of the sum which is compounded from the elements going into the computation of ‘support and maintenance,’ it assumes the nature of any other absolute gift and is not subject to defeat by an extraneous condition. * * * ” However, it can be readily seen that the principle therein discussed is qualified by the words “if absolute,” and a quotation in the plaintiff’s brief which approaches the question under consideration more closely, at least by analogy, is one from In re Martin’s Will, 1936, 269 N.Y. 305 , 199 N.E. 491, 494 , where the f

1958Typical of these cases is In re Gatehouse’s Will, 149 Misc. 648 , 267 N.Y.S. 808, 819 , where it is said: “A gift of ‘support and maintenance,’ if absolute, is therefore merely a gift of a sum of money, the amount of which is ascertainable by a calculation of the component effect of extraneous circumstances and contributing factors, and differs neither in nature nor in kind from an ordinary gift of income; the sole diversity arising from the difference of the factors which unite in determining the particular number of dollars which the donee thereof is entitled to receive.

1958Typical of these cases is In re Gatehouse’s Will, 149 Misc. 648 , 267 N.Y.S. 808, 819 , where it is said: “A gift of ‘support and maintenance,’ if absolute, is therefore merely a gift of a sum of money, the amount of which is ascertainable by a calculation of the component effect of extraneous circumstances and contributing factors, and differs neither in nature nor in kind from an ordinary gift of income; the sole diversity arising from the difference of the factors which unite in determining the particular number of dollars which the donee thereof is entitled to receive.

1878Practice; 54 N. Y., 27 ; 8 Wend., 219 ; 25 Wend., 245 ; 12 John., 493 ; 1 Beas., 353 ; 1 Bland, 12 -35 ; 15 Vermont, 378.) In this State-a defendant anterior to the Code could appeal from a decree pro confesso, and in one case-it was held that the appeal would’only bring up for review the proceedings prior to the default. ( 4 Fla., 11 .) The difference in the rule as stated by the court was occasioned by the fact that in England and New York an appeal might have been taken from interlocutory orders and decrees, while in this State no such appeal could be taken.

1878Practice; 54 N. Y., 27 ; 8 Wend., 219 ; 25 Wend., 245 ; 12 John., 493 ; 1 Beas., 353 ; 1 Bland, 12 -35 ; 15 Vermont, 378.) In this State-a defendant anterior to the Code could appeal from a decree pro confesso, and in one case-it was held that the appeal would’only bring up for review the proceedings prior to the default. ( 4 Fla., 11 .) The difference in the rule as stated by the court was occasioned by the fact that in England and New York an appeal might have been taken from interlocutory orders and decrees, while in this State no such appeal could be taken.

1878Practice; 54 N. Y., 27 ; 8 Wend., 219 ; 25 Wend., 245 ; 12 John., 493 ; 1 Beas., 353 ; 1 Bland, 12 -35 ; 15 Vermont, 378.) In this State-a defendant anterior to the Code could appeal from a decree pro confesso, and in one case-it was held that the appeal would’only bring up for review the proceedings prior to the default. ( 4 Fla., 11 .) The difference in the rule as stated by the court was occasioned by the fact that in England and New York an appeal might have been taken from interlocutory orders and decrees, while in this State no such appeal could be taken.