Summary
finding that the third-party claims must be brought in an independent action after the death of a spouse when no judgment dissolving the marriage was entered
Summary of this case from Malave v. MalaveOpinion
No. 87-49.
July 7, 1987. Rehearing Denied September 4, 1987.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Maria M. Korvick, J.
Magill Lewis and R. Fred Lewis, Miami, Goethel and Garcia-Vidal and Richard Karl Goethel, Coral Gables, for appellants.
Horton, Perse Ginsberg and Mallory H. Horton, George J. Shamas, Miami, for appellee.
Before HUBBART, DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.
Finding that when Jose Pedraza joined as defendants certain of the appellants in his 1980 dissolution action against Isabel Pedraza, his wife, he did so expressly to perfect his equitable distribution and special equity claims against his wife, we conclude that the dissolution action was properly dismissed not only as to Isabel upon her death, see Jaris v. Tucker, 414 So.2d 1164 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), but also, because the action against the joined appellants was so interrelated with the dissolution proceeding, as to the joined appellants. Thus, the dismissal of that action did not preclude Jose Pedraza from bringing an independent action against the appellants, and his institution of such an independent action did not properly subject him to a counterclaim for malicious prosecution and abuse of process. Accordingly, the trial court's dismissal of the counterclaim is
Affirmed.