Ederer v. Ederer
| Decision Date | 03 December 2004 |
| Citation | 900 So.2d 427 |
| Parties | Donell B. EDERER v. Michael P. EDERER. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Robert E. Gibney, Mobile, for appellant.
J.D. Quinlivan, Jr., Mobile; and Claude E. Patton, Mobile, for appellee.
On Remand from the Alabama Supreme Court
Having read and considered the opinion of our Supreme Court in Ex parte Ederer, 900 So.2d 424 (Ala.2004), we make the following return to remand as instructed in that opinion.
Our standard of review when reviewing an appeal from a judgment granting or denying a requested modification of alimony is well settled.
Glover v. Glover, 730 So.2d 218, 220 (Ala. Civ.App.1998) (citation omitted). A trial court is not, however, required to modify alimony because of a change in the circumstances of the parties. Kiefer v. Kiefer, 671 So.2d 710, 711 (Ala.Civ.App.1995). When deciding whether to modify alimony, a trial court should also consider the earning capacity of each spouse, the payee spouse's need for alimony, the payor spouse's ability to pay alimony, and each spouse's estate. Kiefer, 671 So.2d at 711.
Although the wife demonstrated that she had significant monthly expenses and that she was having difficulty meeting those expenses each month, the trial court was free to consider that certain expenses borne by the wife were expenses of her adult children that she was not required to assume. In addition, the trial court could have determined, as the husband argued, that the wife's financial straits were caused or contributed to by her lack of money-management skills, including, for example, her decision to remain in the former marital home despite the expenses associated with it. In light of the requirement that, in the absence of specific findings by a trial court, we presume that a trial court made those findings necessary to support its judgment provided that those findings would be supported by the evidence presented, see Ex parte Bryowsky, 676 So.2d 1322, 1324 (Ala.1996), and upon reconsideration, we have determined that the trial court's judgment denying the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Goldman v. Goldman
...to make this showing....’“ ‘ “Glover v. Glover, 730 So.2d 218, 220 (Ala.Civ.App.1998) (citation omitted).”“ ‘Ederer v. Ederer, 900 So.2d 427, 428 (Ala.Civ.App.2004). “ ‘ “Where a trial court receives ore tenus evidence, its judgment based on that evidence is entitled to a presumption of cor......
-
Alverson v. Alverson
...that would support its judgment, unless such findings would be unsupported by the evidence in the record on appeal. Ederer v. Ederer, 900 So.2d 427, 428 (Ala.Civ.App. 2004) (citing Ex parte Bryowsky, 676 So.2d 1322, 1324 The mother's argument on appeal is a page-long paragraph in which the ......
-
Henning v. Henning
...be necessary to support its judgment, provided, of course, that the evidence would support those implicit findings. Ederer v. Ederer, 900 So.2d 427, 428 (Ala.Civ.App. 2004) (citing Ex parte Bryowsky, 676 So.2d 1322, 1324 (Ala.1996)). Although a trial court's judgment on an alimony-modificat......
-
Blount v. Blount
...to make this showing....'"'"Glover v. Glover, 730 So. 2d 218, 220 (Ala. Civ. App. 1998) (citation omitted).""'Ederer v. Ederer, 900 So. 2d 427, 428(Ala. Civ. App. 2004).'"'"Where a trial court receives ore tenus evidence, its judgment based on that evidence is entitled to a presumption of c......