Askegard v. Askegard
| Decision Date | 13 May 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. BT-94,BT-94 |
| Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1166 Dorothy G. ASKEGARD, Appellant, v. Vernon R. ASKEGARD, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
John L. Myrick of Myrick & Davis, P.A., Pensacola, for appellant.
Charles J. Kahn, Jr. and Richard E. Scherling of Levin, Warfield, Middlebrooks, Mabie, Thomas, Mayes & Mitchell, P.A., Pensacola, for appellee.
This cause is before us on appeal of a final order of dissolution awarding the wife $750 monthly rehabilitative alimony for two years, $250 per child monthly child support, and the marital home and its furnishings as lump-sum alimony. The husband was awarded the parties' second home and itsfurnishings and the rights to his retirement plans. Other personal property was divided approximately equally. The wife raises two issues for our consideration: (1) that it was error to award rehabilitative, not permanent, alimony, and (2) the amount of the alimony awarded was insufficient. On the record before us, we reverse.
The parties were married in 1963 and have two children, born in 1968 and 1971. Only one remains a minor, and he will reach majority in 1989. The husband is a 48-year-old TWA 727 copilot. The wife is a 46-year-old homemaker. The parties met while the husband was a Navy pilot, and although the wife worked as a clerk typist for a year or two after the marriage, she stopped working when they began a family. She has not worked since. Both the wife and husband have two years of college.
During the marriage, the parties accumulated two substantial real property assets. One, the marital home, was custom-built by the parties in 1976 and is appraised at $178,000. The other, a beach duplex, was acquired later and has been appraised several times, with estimates ranging from $175,000 to $215,000. The equity in both is approximately the same, although impossible to specify because of the varying duplex appraisals. Currently, the husband lives in one unit and rents the other.
The husband's salary from 1983 to 1985 ranged between $70,000 and $80,000, 1 but his current salary has been reduced substantially due to his employer's corporate takeover and a resulting 29 percent salary cut in 1986. The record indicates that at the time of the final hearing, the husband's salary was somewhere in the $50,000 range. The wife has no income and argues on appeal that she has monthly expenses totaling $1,835, excluding health and dental insurance. The husband's amended financial affidavit shows a net monthly income of $2,647. Mortgage payments, property taxes, and homeowners insurance for both homes totals $1,575 monthly, after accounting for average monthly rentals for the second unit in the duplex. Since the mortgage, taxes, and insurance on the wife's home total $795 monthly, the wife will be unable to maintain the mortgage once child support ends for the youngest child.
On the record before us, we must agree with the wife that the trial court erred when it awarded her rehabilitative alimony for two years. "The principle purpose of rehabilitative alimony is to establish the capacity for self-support of the receiving...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thomas v. Thomas
...during the marriage. Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Sisson v. Sisson, 336 So.2d 1129 (Fla.1976); Askegard v. Askegard, 524 So.2d 736, 737 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 536 So.2d 243 (Fla.1988); Lutgert v. Lutgert, 362 So.2d 58, 60 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 367 S......
-
Zeigler v. Zeigler
...earn a salary which would allow the party to live in accordance with the lifestyle established during the marriage. Askegard v. Askegard, 524 So.2d 736 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), rev. denied, 536 So.2d 243 (Fla.1988); Akers v. Akers, 582 So.2d 1212 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) rev. denied, 592 So.2d 679 (......
-
Kanouse v. Kanouse
...standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage. O'Neal v. O'Neal, 410 So.2d 1369, 1371 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Askegard v. Askegard, 524 So.2d 736, 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Womble, 521 So.2d at In the instant case the trial court seems to have overlooked this consideration. The former wife......
-
Paulsen v. Paulsen
...reasonably commensurate with the standard established by the husband during the course of a long-term marriage." Askegard v. Askegard, 524 So.2d 736, 737 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 536 So.2d 243 (Fla.1988), citing O'Neal v. O'Neal, 410 So.2d 1369, 1371 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). Generally, alim......