Case Name: Maude S. VINCENT, Appellant, v. Mathieu VINCENT, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1987-05-26
Citations: 507 So. 2d 774
Docket Number: No. 86-1830
Parties: Maude S. VINCENT, Appellant, v. Mathieu VINCENT, Appellee.
Judges: Before HENDRY, NESBITT and BASKIN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 507
Pages: 774–774

Head Matter:
Maude S. VINCENT, Appellant, v. Mathieu VINCENT, Appellee.
No. 86-1830.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
May 26, 1987.
Rehearing Denied June 23, 1987.
Louise H. McMurray, Miami, for appellant.
Walters, Costanzo, Russell, Zyne & Newman and Mark Newman, Miami, for appel-lee.
Before HENDRY, NESBITT and BASKIN, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Because the husband failed to request an award of special equity, Gleason v. Gleason, 453 So.2d 941 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Stetson v. Stetson, 356 So.2d 53 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); see Hernandez v. Hernandez, 444 So.2d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), review denied, 451 So.2d 848 (Fla.1984), and failed to prove his entitlement to a special equity, see Vandegrift v. Vandegrift, 477 So.2d 638 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Gregg v. Gregg, 474 So.2d 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Smith v. Smith, 428 So.2d 276, 279 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (on rehearing), we reverse that portion of the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage granting the husband a special equity in various assets. Our disposition of this issue makes it unnecessary to reach the remaining issues raised by appellant.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.