Opinion ID: 1100316
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 14

Heading: Any other factor which in equity should be considered.

Text: ¶ 38. This factor can best be discussed by quoting from Judge Griffis's excellent analysis for the Court of Appeals in Haney II: The evidence in this case ... clearly established that throughout their marriage Pat and Bob maintained separate residences and separate businesses. Pat did little to contribute to the accumulation of Bob's total wealth. Pat's business decisions caused the drastic reduction in her own wealth and in her income. Bob and Pat maintained separate checking accounts and had separate investments. Their marriage lasted only seventeen months.... [T]he only conclusion that the record supports is that Pat and Bob, although married, lived lives that were financially separate and independent of each other or their marriage. Haney II, 881 So.2d at 867. ¶ 39. Stated another way, there is little evidence in the record that Pat and Bob considered their marriage more than a legal formality. This factor weighs against equitable distribution. ¶ 40. Thus, no further analysis by the chancellor is necessary. The uncontested marital assets have already been divided. No equitable distribution of other assets can be justified from the record before us. We therefore find further analysis by the chancellor is unnecessary.