Case Name: David M. HENSON, Appellant, v. Sandra A. VALENTINE, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2005-08-23
Citations: 910 So. 2d 882
Docket Number: No. 5D04-82
Parties: David M. HENSON, Appellant, v. Sandra A. VALENTINE, Appellee.
Judges: SHARP, W., GRIFFIN and ORFINGER JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 910
Pages: 882–882

Head Matter:
David M. HENSON, Appellant, v. Sandra A. VALENTINE, Appellee.
No. 5D04-82.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Aug. 23, 2005.
Kenneth A. Studstill, of Kenneth A. Studstill, P.A., Titusville, for Appellant.
Kurt Erlenbach and Susan K.W. Erlen-bach, of Kurt Erlenbach, P.A., Titusville, for Appellee.
. Judge Orfinger did not participate in oral argument but has reviewed the briefs and the

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
In a court proceeding infected by serious misconduct by both litigants, David M. Henson appeals a final judgment dissolving his marriage to Sandra A. Valentine. With ample record support, the trial judge found that both parties concealed assets, disregarded court orders and falsified documents. The court also found that both parties committed bodily harm to the other and lacked credibility.
Because of the parties' conduct, it was virtually impossible for the trial court to sort out the alimony and equitable distribution issues between the parties. We have suffered the same fate when reviewing the record. Having reviewed the extensive record carefully, we commend the trial judge for his thoroughness and patience in resolving the matter, despite the fact that neither party appears to have been interested in a fair resolution. We are not convinced that the record reflects any reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
SHARP, W., GRIFFIN and ORFINGER JJ., concur.