Skip to main content

Jahnke v. Jahnke

Citations

  • 804 So. 2d 513
  • 2001 WL 1643919

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that “assets should not, ordinarily, be valued as of a post-dissolution date because subsequent change in a property’s value due to non-marital labor or efforts cannot be distributed”
  • finding the pension owner was required to prove that some portion was paid for using premarital contributions
  • “We agree . . . that a court cannot award relief that was not requested in the pleadings.”
  • “’The burden of proof is on the spouse who wishes to show that an asset or liability acquired during the marriage is not . . . marital . . . .’” (quoting Gladstone v. Gladstone, 733 So. 2d 1090, 1092 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Jorgenson, Fletcher, and Ramirez

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.