Case Name: John FORTE, Appellant, v. Mary FORTE, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1985-11-12
Citations: 478 So. 2d 460
Docket Number: No. 85-1429
Parties: John FORTE, Appellant, v. Mary FORTE, Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUB-BART and BASKIN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 478
Pages: 460–460

Head Matter:
John FORTE, Appellant, v. Mary FORTE, Appellee.
No. 85-1429.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Nov. 12, 1985.
Hauser & Metsch and Lydia A. Fernandez, Miami, for appellant.
Fred M. Dellapa, Miami, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUB-BART and BASKIN, JJ.

Opinion:
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
The trial court correctly held that, in contrast to the provision of the parties' separation agreement and the final judgment of dissolution requiring the husband to provide a home for the wife and children, which we held in Forte v. Forte, 320 So.2d 446 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), cert. denied, 351 So.2d 406 (Fla.1977), was a modifiable aspect of child support, the portion which grants the wife an option to purchase the home conferred a vested property right which is for that reason not subject to modification. Farkas v. Farkas, 426 So.2d 1213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); see Peacock v. Peacock, 439 So.2d 984 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Accordingly, the order dismissing the husband's application for modification of the option is
Affirmed.