Laserfiche WebLink
While the Petitioner argues that Petitioner "did not leave the property as "husband" and that the <br />Escambia County Family Law Court ordered the property to be sold which meant that the Petitioner <br />remained as tenants in common with the now ex-spouse and the designation of "husband and wife" <br />were not applicable and that F.S. 193.155 is applicable but the focus should be in the tenants in <br />common relationship and not the husband -and -wife relationship when one looks at subsection (8) (d) of <br />F.S. 193.155, a preponderance of the evidence still shows that persuasive in the instant denial is that the <br />Form DR-501TS, "Designation of Ownership shares of Abandoned Homestead" is essential to the <br />resolution to the instant petition, and yet, was not executed by the parties. The language on the form <br />itself says "File this form if you and your spouse (or former spouse) are current or former joint owners of <br />qualifying property and want to designate shares of the homestead assessment difference." In the <br />instant matter, a preponderance of the evidence shows that the Petitioner and now ex-spouse were <br />once "joint owners" of the property at issue. <br />I <br />A preponderance of the evidence shows that through the testimony of the Property Appraiser's Office <br />representative William Hynacki if the Form DR-501TS, "Designation of Ownership shares of Abandoned <br />Homestead' j is executed, the relief that the Petitioner seeks would be allowed by that agency. Indeed, a <br />preponderance of the evidence shows that by and through Petitioner's own testimony that "if Petitioner <br />fails in the instant matter that Petitioner can then petition the Family Law Court that the property was <br />not properly' divided" and seek the relief in that forum. <br />A preponderance of the evidence shows that Petitioner in PETITION 2021-00049 has not demonstrated <br />that the instant exemption and relief that the Petitioner seeks should be granted. This Special <br />Magistrate recommends the instant petition should not be granted and the relief sought by Petitioner <br />should not be granted. As to PETITION 2021-00049 said petition is recommended to be DENIED. <br />-31- <br />