HomeMy WebLinkAbout0939 #
• ~
~ F
With respect to the fencing, the Court does not
believe Defendant has met her burden to demonstrate that
she paid the entire cost. The testimony was in direct
conflict and the paid statements are in joint names. The
Court also finds it hard to comprehend how the Defendant, who
by her. own testimony had very little financial means a£ter
her divorce, could afford to pay for the entire fencing
without the help of the decedent. Therefore, the De£endant's
claim as to the fencing is denied.
Based upon the foregoing, it is thereupon ~
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
l. Defendant shall receive the swn of $147.00 from
the $898.00 now being held in escrow. Upon payment of same
the Defendant or her counsel shall file a Satisfaction of
Judgment in this action.
2. The balance of the escrowed funds shall be paid
to the Plaintiff and disbursed by her in a proper manner in
the probate proceedings of the decedent which are pending in
this Court.
3. The Court reserves jurisdiction in this matter
to enter such further orders as may be proper.
DONE AND ORDERE~ in Fort Pierce, St. Lucie County,
Florida this y-1:~ day of December, 1986.
cott M. Kenne
Circuit Jud
Copies to:
William E. Raikes, III, Esquire
~ Alberta S. Widman, Esquire
7~9:~mi~3
~6 !~'C ~1 p .
2 •31
F~tFO ~.ti~_~ ~ - -
ST ~~~lt vtC'tir"Y`_r:F•
~i ~
Pt~O 9 3 ~a ~
~0526 ~
. ~