Helmick v. Taylor
A mother-in-law sued her former son-in-law claiming she was an intended third-party beneficiary of the marital settlement agreement in which he agreed to pay loans she and her mother had made to him. The Second District affirmed summary judgment for the former son-in-law, holding that merely naming a creditor and the debt amount in a marital settlement agreement that allocates marital debts does not clearly express an intent to primarily and directly benefit that creditor.
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.