Carlos E. Clark v. Jacqueline Clark, et al.

Miami, Florida family law lawyers represented the parties in a divorce.



In this intrafamily dispute, the former husband challenges a nonfinal order granting intervention and requiring him to transfer his interest in the former marital residence to his son after the trial court imposed a constructive trust over the property. On appeal, he contends the trial court misconstrued the terms of the negotiated final judgment that served as the basis for the ruling below. We are not so persuaded.



Although the underlying agreement is far from a model of clarity, we conclude the former husband plainly waived any right to equitable distribution by stipulating he would place all funds to which he was otherwise entitled-including fifty percent of the proceeds garnered from the future sale of the marital residence-in trust for the benefit of his then nine-year-old son. See Rose v. Steigleman, 32 So.3d 644, 645 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) ("A trial court's interpretation of a contract is a matter of law and is thus subject to de novo review."); see also Lab'y Corp. of Am. v. Davis, 339 So.3d 318, 324 (Fla. 2022) ("Under the whole-text canon, proper interpretation requires consideration of 'the entire text, in view of its structure and of the physical and logical relation of its many parts.'") (citing Antonin Scalia &Bryan A. Garner, Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts 167 (2012)); F.H. Paschen, S.N. Nielsen & Assocs. LLC v. B&B Site Dev., Inc., 311 So.3d 39, 44 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) ("A contract should be read as a whole.");

EcoVirux, LLC v. BioPledge, LLC, 357 So.3d 182, 186 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) ("[W]ords and phrases in a contract cannot be considered in isolation."). Upon reaching the age of majority, the son was to receive the funds outright, as the trust was designed to automatically terminate.



* * *



Legal issue Can a constructive trust be imposed to transfer a former marital residence interest to a son when a former husband fails to fulfill a trust funding obligation stipulated in a divorce agreement?

Headnote



FAMILY LAW. CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST. The case addresses whether the trial court properly imposed a constructive trust over fifty percent of the former marital residence to benefit the appellant's son due to the appellant's failure to establish and fund a trust as stipulated in a final judgment.



CONTRACT LAW. INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENTS. The court examined whether the trial court erred in interpreting a negotiated final judgment, concluding that the appellant waived his rights to equitable distribution under the agreement, thus validating the imposition of a constructive trust.



Key Phrases Intrafamily dispute. Constructive trust. Equitable distribution. Marital residence. Nonfinal order.

Affirmed