Melissa Lynn Malone v. Ronald Louis Malone, Jr.
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledOctober 30, 2026
Docket5D2025-0653
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
Case No. 5D2025-0653
LT Case No. 2020-DR-003447
_____________________________
MELISSA LYNN MALONE,
Appellant,
v.
RONALD LOUIS MALONE, JR.,
Appellee.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County.
Jennifer Lester Bass, Judge.
Christopher R. Bruce, Ashley Dillman Bruce, and Sarina M.
Sabatino, of Bruce Law Firm, P.A., West Palm Beach, for
Appellant.
Ronald Louis Malone, Jr., Ocala, pro se.
October 30, 2026
HARRIS, J.
Melissa Lynn Malone (“Former Wife”) appeals the Final
Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage entered below as well as the
order denying her motion for rehearing, reconsideration and to
reopen evidence. In this appeal, Former Wife raises numerous
issues regarding the judgment and the proceedings below,
including that the trial court failed to properly calculate certain
business liabilities in its equitable distribution scheme. This error,
according to the Former Wife, has resulted in a largely skewed and
unjustified unequal distribution to her detriment. To his credit,
Ronald Malone (“Former Husband”) has conceded error on this
point and has acknowledged that this matter should be remanded
to allow the trial court to correct its mathematical error to
accurately represent the parties’ 51% ownership of these business
liabilities.
We find that it was error for the trial court to assign 100% of
the business debt to Former Husband in its equitable distribution
scheme when the parties own 51% of the business and the Former
Husband testified that his business partner is responsible for 49%
of these liabilities. We remand for correction of this error and
instruct the trial court to reconsider the equitable distribution
given the change in debt assignment. We find no reversible error
with respect to the additional claims raised by Former Wife and
therefore affirm on all remaining issues.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED with
instructions.
EISNAUGLE, and KILBANE, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.
_____________________________
2