Case Name: James B. MAYS, Appellant, v. Eleanore Ball MAYS, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1967-11-14
Citations: 203 So. 2d 674
Docket Number: No. 67-49
Parties: James B. MAYS, Appellant, v. Eleanore Ball MAYS, Appellee.
Judges: Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 203
Pages: 674–676

Head Matter:
James B. MAYS, Appellant, v. Eleanore Ball MAYS, Appellee.
No. 67-49.
District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.
Nov. 14, 1967.
Rehearing Denied Nov. 29, 1967.
John F. Harkness, No. Miami, forappel-lant.
Joseph A. McGowan, Miami, for appel-lee.
Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The husband, defendant below, appeals from a final decree of divorce for the wife, plaintiff below.
The final decree found the husband "guilty of the allegations of the complaint as amended" and "that the defendant engaged in a course of conduct inimical to the wife's welfare and that he is guilty of the charges made by the pleadings." The husband claims that reversible error was committed in this finding.
The appellant husband has failed to provide us, in the record on appeal, with a copy of the complaint, as amended. We cannot find reversible error under the circumstances. See Gilson v. Murphy, Fearnley and Yawn, Inc., Fla.App.1963, 151 So.2d 447.
The husband also claims error in the award by the final decree of the home of the parties on Miami Beach, Florida and two hundred shares of Florida Power and Light Company stock, each in both names, to the wife, under the theory of a resulting trust. The record shows that the wife alone contributed the money for the purchase of the house and stock, although it was registered in both their names.
In Olsen v. Olsen, Fla.App.1967, 195 So.2d 864, we said:
*
" A transfer from a wife to a husband of her separate property is not presumed to be a gift, and the burden is on the husband to establish the fact that the receipt of any of his vnfe's separate property is in fact a gift. See: Forde v. Forde, 152 Fla. 142, 10 So.2d 919; Jones v. Jones, Fla.App.1960, 121 So.2d 811; Allen v. Allen, Fla.App.1960, 123 So.2d 355."
‡ :jc ‡ sfc
Here, the record shows no attempt was made by the husband to establish a gift from the wife to himself of this real and personal property and he has therefore failed to carry this burden.
The appellee wife has cross-assigned as error the denial of attorney fees to her by the final decree. The granting of suit money and attorney fees in a divorce action is within the sound judicial discretion of a chancellor. Ames v. Ames, Fla.App.1963, 153 So.2d 737. Under the facts and circumstances in this case no abuse of discretion has clearly been shown.
The final decree is therefore
Affirmed.