← Case library
6th DCASeptember 4, 2026Reversed⭐ Notable

Vega v. Jaramillo

Case No. 6D2025-0532

After a dissolution judgment classified a home titled solely in the husband's name as 'marital property' and awarded him possession and sole mortgage responsibility, the ex-wife filed a separate partition action. The trial court found the parties were tenants in common and ordered sale and equal division. The Sixth District reversed, holding that classification of property as marital for equitable distribution purposes does not create joint title or a tenancy by the entireties, so the ex-wife lacked the title interest required to maintain a partition action under section 64.031.

Key facts

  • Husband and wife divorced; trial court classified home titled solely in husband's name as 'marital property' and awarded him possession with sole mortgage responsibility.
  • Ex-wife filed a separate partition action seeking equal division; trial court found parties were tenants in common and ordered sale with equal distribution.
  • +2 more key facts with a free trial

Why it matters

The opinion draws a clear line between equitable-distribution classification and record title, a distinction that recurs whenever a former spouse or co-occupant seeks partition after divorce. Real property and family… — full analysis with a trial

Best value · free

Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days

The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.

  • Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
  • Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
  • Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Start my free 30-day trial → No credit card required
👀 Take a quick tour of the site → 60 seconds · click a real case · no login

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.