Turchin v. Turchin
2009 WL 2871564, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 13182, 16 So.3d 1042 (2009)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A valid and unambiguous antenuptial agreement that specifically provides for the distribution of jointly held property overrides the common law presumption that a gift was intended when one spouse purchases property with separate funds and titles it in both spouses' names.
Facts:
- In 1987, Sharyn Turchin and Leslie Turchin married and entered into an antenuptial agreement to protect their premarital assets.
- During the marriage, Leslie Turchin used his own premarital assets to purchase two properties, known as Coconut Isle and Aqua Vista.
- Leslie Turchin took title to both properties in his and Sharyn Turchin's names as husband and wife.
- The Coconut Isle property was sold, and the proceeds were deposited into the couple's joint checking account.
- Leslie Turchin later withdrew most of these proceeds from the joint account to satisfy his personal obligations and deposited the remainder into his individual account.
- The Aqua Vista property was also sold, with the buyers executing a mortgage in favor of both Leslie and Sharyn Turchin.
- In January 2006, Leslie Turchin died, and his trust directed that the remaining balance on the Aqua Vista mortgage be forgiven.
Procedural Posture:
- Sharyn Turchin filed a claim against the Estate of Leslie S. Turchin in the trial court, seeking proceeds from the sale of the Coconut Isle property.
- Sharyn Turchin also initiated a separate foreclosure proceeding related to the Aqua Vista property mortgage.
- The Estate filed a counterclaim seeking declaratory relief and the imposition of a constructive trust over the mortgage proceeds.
- Both parties moved for summary judgment in the trial court.
- The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Estate, ruling that the antenuptial agreement controlled the distribution of the assets.
- Sharyn Turchin, as appellant, appealed the trial court's final summary judgment order to the Fourth District Court of Appeal of Florida.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the legal presumption of a gift apply when one spouse uses premarital assets to acquire property and titles it in both spouses' names, if the parties have a valid antenuptial agreement that unambiguously dictates how such property is to be distributed?
Opinions:
Majority - Damoorgian, J.
No, the legal presumption of a gift does not apply in this situation. While a gift is generally presumed under Florida law when property is purchased by one spouse but placed in both names, this presumption is displaced when an antenuptial agreement specifically designates how the jointly held property is to be distributed. The court reasoned that a primary purpose of an antenuptial agreement is to modify or shrink the general discretion of a judge and to define the mutual equities between the parties. Because the agreement in this case unambiguously provided for the distribution of jointly held property based upon who funded its acquisition, the specific terms of the contract control over the general legal presumption.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the primacy of contract law in the context of marital agreements. It clarifies that antenuptial agreements are powerful tools that can override default common law presumptions concerning marital property. For legal practice, this means that practitioners can confidently draft agreements to insulate premarital assets, knowing that courts will uphold clear and unambiguous terms over general equitable principles. The ruling provides certainty to individuals entering marriage by confirming that their expressed contractual intent regarding property distribution will be honored.
