Gall v. Gall, 74--1525
| Decision Date | 04 August 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 74--1525,74--1525 |
| Citation | 336 So.2d 10 |
| Parties | Elizabeth H. GALL, Appellant, v. John R. GALL, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
William P. O'Malley, Clearwater, for appellant.
Loyd C. Mosley, Clearwater, for appellee.
The record in this suit for dissolution reflects that the parties had been married thirty years. They had four children, three of whom were grown. The youngest, a fourteen year old daughter, lives with her mother in the family home. The husband retired from the Air Force as a Colonel in 1970 and draws $790 per month retirement pay. This, together with what he earns driving a school bus, gives him a net monthly income of $1,156. The wife did not work while the parties were in the service, but upon the husband's retirement, she became employed as a secretary. In this capacity she now earns a net monthly income of $383. Except for a jointly owned home, neither party owns any substantial assets.
In granting dissolution, the court ordered the husband to pay the wife $150 per month plus medical and dental expenses as child support so long as the minor child was living with the wife. Except for two motor vehicles, one of which was given to each party, the parties' property was said to be jointly owed and thus held as tenants in common following the dissolution. The court declined to grant alimony.
The wife's first contention with respect to the division of property is without merit. However, we believe the court erred in failing to make a provision for permanent alimony. Each party filed financial statements with the court which were substantially contradicted. Disregarding certain voluntary contributions he was making to an older daughter and before deduction of the $150 per month child support payment ordered by the court, the excess of the husband's net monthly income over expenses was $414.50. Likewise, disregarding the child support payment, the wife's monthly expenses exceeded her net income by $193.63. Furthermore, among the husband's monthly expenses was $144 which the court required the husband to pay on the house mortgage. However, the judgment provided that upon a suit for partition to compel the sale of the house owned by the parties as tenants in common, the husband would be entitled to recover one-half of the mortgage payments. Therefore, in view of the fact that the court did not award the wife the use of the house while the minor child was with her, there was nothing to keep the husband from immediately bringing suit to partition the house, thereby reducing his monthly expenses by $77 and placing upon the wife the requirement of starting to pay for a place to live.
We believe this point is controlled by our decision in Lash v. Lash, Fla.App.2d, 1975, 307 So.2d 241. There is enough similarity in the facts of the two cases to dictate the application of the same principles. In Lash, we said:
'There is apparently a feeling in some circles that the passage of the 'no-fault' divorce law in 1971 had the effect of abolishing permanent alimony except where the wife (or the husband, as the case may be) is unable to get a job. We know of no controlling decision to this effect and do not believe it to be the law. The only changes made with respect to alimony were to authorize its payment to either spouse and to permit an award of rehabilitative alimony. The fact that the legislature authorized rehabilitative alimony did not do away with permanent alimony. The provision authorizing rehabilitative alimony simply permits the judge in a proper circumstances to award support to a needy spouse for a limited period of time until she gets back on her feet and becomes self-sustaining. However,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McIntyre v. McIntyre, AN-449
...father. Although the preference of a child is one factor to be considered, it cannot control the disposition of custody. Gall v. Gall, 336 So.2d 10 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976).(383 So.2d at 1173).2 The mother, for example, admitted that if the children were to remain in Jacksonville with their fathe......
-
Krieger v. Krieger, CC--64
...DCA 1975); Norton v. Norton, 328 So.2d 484 (Fla.1st DCA 1976); Nevins v. Nevins, 305 So.2d 63 (Fla.3rd DCA 1974); Gall v. Gall, 336 So.2d 10 (Fla.2nd DCA 1976); Fugassi v. Fugassi, 332 So.2d 695 (Fla.4th DCA 1976); Calligarich v. Calligarich, 256 So.2d 60 (Fla.4th DCA 1971); Sharpe v. Sharp......
-
Elkins v. Vanden Bosch, s. 82-1602
...while a factor to be considered and weighed, cannot control the disposition of custody. Garvey v. Garvey, 383 So.2d 1172; Gall v. Gall, 336 So.2d 10 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976). Cf. Goldstein v. Goldstein, 264 So.2d 49 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972). Here there is no finding that the mother is any less fit a pa......
-
McAllister v. McAllister
...DCA 1976); Hausman v. Hausman, 330 So.2d 833 (Fla.3rd DCA 1976); Norton v. Norton, 328 So.2d 484 (Fla.1st DCA 1976); Gall v. Gall, 336 So.2d 10 (Fla.2nd DCA 1976); Fugassi v. Fugassi, 332 So.2d 695 (Fla.4th DCA 1976); In re Marriage of Stevens, 327 So.2d 851 (Fla.4th DCA 1976); Sommese v. S......
-
Joint Custody: An Exploration of the Issues
...S.E. 2d 349 (App. Div. 1948).9559 P. 2d 942 (Ore. Ct. App. 1977).10Utley v. Utley 3 Fam. L. Rep. 2047 (D.C. Ct. App. 1976).11Gall v. Gall 336 So. 2d 10 (Fla. App. 1976).12Wood v. Wood 400 S.W. 2d 431 (St. Louis Ct. App. 134 Fam L. Rep. 2302 (N.Y. Cty Sup. Ct. 1978).144 Fam L. Rep. 2522 (N.Y......